On Sat, 17 Dec 2016 20:51:01 +0100
Marcus Schopen wrote:
> > SpamAssassin usually deals with this problem by looking for
> > authentication in the header, but that's not recorded here.
>
> There is no auth hint in the header when using the submission server.
>
> Received: from [192.168.178.25
Hi,
Am Samstag, den 17.12.2016, 13:17 + schrieb RW:
> On Fri, 16 Dec 2016 22:41:49 +0100
> Marcus Schopen wrote:
>
>
> > The problem is, that smtp-out.myoffice.de is also a submission server
> > for dialup clients. Headers from to to down:
> >
> > Received: from smtp-out.myoffice.de by MY_S
On Fri, 16 Dec 2016 22:41:49 +0100
Marcus Schopen wrote:
> The problem is, that smtp-out.myoffice.de is also a submission server
> for dialup clients. Headers from to to down:
>
> Received: from smtp-out.myoffice.de by MY_SERVER_IP
> Received: from dialup-client-IP by smtp-out.myoffice.de
SpamA
Hi,
I have configuration problems with trusted_networks and
internal_networks when forwarding my office mails to my private server,
because one server in the trust chain is also a submission server.
My current setup is simple (SA runs on my private server =
MY_SERVER_IP):
trusted_networks
On lør 24 jul 2010 15:05:22 CEST, Matt Kettler wrote
[snip]
However, 127.0.0.1 should exist. NO_RELAYS means SA interpreted the mail
as having no origin at all, not even localhost, and that implies a
serious lack of information being passed to SA.
sendmail -bv root
gives me a nice NO_RELAYS in
On 7/23/2010 10:05 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On fre 23 jul 2010 04:49:40 CEST, Matt Kettler wrote
>> Fair enough... I was keying off Benny's suggestion to lower the score of
>> both ALL_TRUSTED and NO_RELAYS, the latter of which is never a good
>> sign.
>
> as all in life it depends :=)
>
> grep
On fre 23 jul 2010 04:49:40 CEST, Matt Kettler wrote
Fair enough... I was keying off Benny's suggestion to lower the score of
both ALL_TRUSTED and NO_RELAYS, the latter of which is never a good sign.
as all in life it depends :=)
grep NO_RELAYS /var/log/messages to see if all is accepted ham
On 7/20/2010 9:07 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> On 7/19/2010 8:23 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
>> On 7/16/2010 2:31 PM, Cliff Hayes wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Our webmail server is on the same server as sendmail and spamassassin.
>>>
>>> I would like to filter outbound webmail but can't because
On 7/19/2010 8:23 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
> On 7/16/2010 2:31 PM, Cliff Hayes wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Our webmail server is on the same server as sendmail and spamassassin.
>>
>> I would like to filter outbound webmail but can't because the most recent
>> versions of spamassassin have 127.0.0.1 tru
On 7/16/2010 2:31 PM, Cliff Hayes wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Our webmail server is on the same server as sendmail and spamassassin.
>
> I would like to filter outbound webmail but can't because the most recent
> versions of spamassassin have 127.0.0.1 trusted by default.
>
> How can I override this? Or i
On fre 16 jul 2010 21:23:22 CEST, Cliff Hayes wrote
PERFECT! THANKS!
You're right. I use mimedefang too.
I capitalized ALL_TRUSTED and NO_RELAYS and put them in sa-mimedefang.cf and
now everything is scanned.
Thanks again :)
scan some mails like this:
spamassassin -t msg
does it works l
users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: disable trusted_networks and internal_networks
On fre 16 jul 2010 20:31:21 CEST, Cliff Hayes wrote
> How can I override this? Or is that a bad idea for other reasons?
score all_trusted 0.01
score no_relays 0.01
but as i can see you use mimedefang w
On fre 16 jul 2010 20:31:21 CEST, Cliff Hayes wrote
How can I override this? Or is that a bad idea for other reasons?
score all_trusted 0.01
score no_relays 0.01
but as i can see you use mimedefang with have independice networking
setup for what not to scan
if its sent to mimedefang its s
Hello,
Our webmail server is on the same server as sendmail and spamassassin.
I would like to filter outbound webmail but can't because the most recent
versions of spamassassin have 127.0.0.1 trusted by default.
How can I override this? Or is that a bad idea for other reasons?
Thanks in advanc
On Tue, July 14, 2009 21:26, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
> Duh. Dumb. Arrgh! Hit! Damn.
its rocket science :)
--
xpoint
Jari Fredriksson a écrit :
>> [snip]
>> when I put your lines in my config, I only seethe
>> 127.0.0.1/32 warning.
>>
>
>>>
>>> It looks like SA itself configured the trusted.
>
> I removed both the 127.0.0.1 AND 10/8 and this is happy again. It seems to
> configure the internal networks as tru
> Jari Fredriksson a écrit :
>> I tried with this:
>>
>> -(local.cf)---
>>
>> internal_networks 10.0.0.0/8
>> trusted_networks 10.0.0.0/8 127.0.0.1
>> trusted_networks 212.16.98.0/24 212.16.100.0/24
>> 62.142.0.0/16 195.197.172.98 trusted_networks
>> 195.74.0.0/16 213.192.189.2/24
> Jari Fredriksson a écrit :
>> I tried with this:
>>
>> -(local.cf)---
>>
>> internal_networks 10.0.0.0/8
>> trusted_networks 10.0.0.0/8 127.0.0.1
>> trusted_networks 212.16.98.0/24 212.16.100.0/24
>> 62.142.0.0/16 195.197.172.98 trusted_networks
>> 195.74.0.0/16 213.192.189.2/24
Jari Fredriksson a écrit :
> I tried with this:
>
> -(local.cf)---
>
> internal_networks 10.0.0.0/8
> trusted_networks 10.0.0.0/8 127.0.0.1
> trusted_networks 212.16.98.0/24 212.16.100.0/24 62.142.0.0/16 195.197.172.98
> trusted_networks 195.74.0.0/16 213.192.189.2/24 217.30.188.0
On Tue, July 14, 2009 14:48, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
> Yeah. My LAN is using 10/8 for hysterical reasons. Is there something wrong
> here?
just that your source have now rfc1918 ranges hardcorded into sa, so remove
your own internal/trsuted/msa for rfc1918 will solve it
ps: i have not seen the
Jari Fredriksson wrote:
I tried with this:
-(local.cf)---
internal_networks 10.0.0.0/8
trusted_networks 10.0.0.0/8 127.0.0.1
trusted_networks 212.16.98.0/24 212.16.100.0/24 62.142.0.0/16 195.197.172.98
trusted_networks 195.74.0.0/16 213.192.189.2/24 217.30.188.0/24 65.54.0.0/16
> On Tue, July 14, 2009 13:25, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
>
>> [7594] warn: netset: cannot include 127.0.0.1/32 as it
>> has already been included [7594] warn: netset: cannot
>> include 10.0.0.0/8 as it has already been included It
>> looks like SA itself configured the trusted.
>
> rfc1918
>
Yea
On Tue, July 14, 2009 13:25, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
> [7594] warn: netset: cannot include 127.0.0.1/32 as it has already been
> included
> [7594] warn: netset: cannot include 10.0.0.0/8 as it has already been included
> It looks like SA itself configured the trusted.
rfc1918
sa 3.3 ?
--
xpo
> Jari Fredriksson a écrit :
>>> MrGibbage a écrit :
#ps11651.dreamhostps.com and pelorus.org
internal_networks 75.119.219.171
trusted_networks 75.119.219.171 #I think this is wrong
>>> no, it is not wrong. the documentation says:
>>>
>>> Every entry in "internal_networks" must appe
>
> where did your squirrelmail go now ?
I use it when I'm not sitting at home. It is up on my server, but I do not use
it if I have access to my workstation.
I prefer Outlook Express with OE-QuoteFix over any other IMAP client I have
tested.
On Tue, July 14, 2009 00:42, mouss wrote:
> the requirement is "reasonable". an "internal" relay that wouldn't be
> "trusted" is irrelevant. why would you want to skip PBL/DUL lookup for
> an IP that may be forged?
if thats the problem the mail wont get delivered in the first place
--
xpoint
On Tue, July 14, 2009 00:08, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
>> so whenever you put an internal_network line, you should
>> add the same line with "trusted" instead of "internal".
> If that is indeed true, it is a BUG IMO.
> Brain dead requirement!
at least its open source so one can make a good patch to
On Mon, July 13, 2009 23:55, mouss wrote:
> so whenever you put an internal_network line, you should add the same
> line with "trusted" instead of "internal".
in other words, internal cant be untrusted
so if you see spam with origin as internal networks ip then remove that ip as
internal
--
x
Jari Fredriksson a écrit :
>> MrGibbage a écrit :
>>> #ps11651.dreamhostps.com and pelorus.org
>>> internal_networks 75.119.219.171
>>> trusted_networks 75.119.219.171 #I think this is wrong
>> no, it is not wrong. the documentation says:
>>
>> Every entry in "internal_networks" must appear in
>> "
> MrGibbage a écrit :
>> #ps11651.dreamhostps.com and pelorus.org
>> internal_networks 75.119.219.171
>> trusted_networks 75.119.219.171 #I think this is wrong
>
> no, it is not wrong. the documentation says:
>
> Every entry in "internal_networks" must appear in
> "trusted_net-
>
> works";
>
>
MrGibbage a écrit :
> I have read the help pages for those two settings over and over, and I guess
> I'm just not smart enough. I can't figure out what I should put for those
> two settings. Can one of you give me a hand by looking at the headers from
> an email? I can tell you that my SA instal
ant to use the trusted network
> instead to run SPF against the rewritten address.
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/trusted_networks-and-internal_networks-tp24448374p24451803.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 17:29:07 +0200 (CEST)
"Benny Pedersen" wrote:
>
> On Sun, July 12, 2009 16:21, RW wrote:
> > Generally forwarders should go into your internal networks,
>
> no no, internal networks is your own wan ips nothing more, imho
>
> forwarders is trusted/msa
If you do it that way
On Sun, July 12, 2009 16:21, RW wrote:
> Generally forwarders should go into your internal networks,
no no, internal networks is your own wan ips nothing more, imho
forwarders is trusted/msa
> unless they rewrite the return-path
why does this change ?
> or there is a possibility of mail submi
On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 05:54:35 -0700 (PDT)
MrGibbage wrote:
>
> I have read the help pages for those two settings over and over, and
> I guess I'm just not smart enough. I can't figure out what I should
> put for those two settings. Can one of you give me a hand by looking
> at the headers from
219
X-Note: Mail Class: ALLOWEDSENDER
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/trusted_networks-and-internal_networks-tp24448374p24448374.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
ou can really
break SA pretty badly if trusted or internal networks is confused.
> 2. If a mail sent from some smtp, which rule ie required?
??? I don't understand that question.. nearly all mail is sent from some
SMTP...
> 3. What's the difference between trusted_networks and interna
tworks 111.222.11/24
score ALL_TRUSTED -10
1.Above it right?
2. If a mail sent from some smtp, which rule ie required?
3. What's the difference between trusted_networks and internal_networks?
Thanks in advance.
_
책상위에 다리 올리고
, I set like below.
trusted_networks 111.222.11/24
score ALL_TRUSTED -10
1.Above it right?
2. If a mail sent from some smtp, which rule ie required?
3. What's the difference between trusted_networks and internal_networks?
Thanks in ad
39 matches
Mail list logo
