On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 03:25 +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:12:56 -0500, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>
> > > DNSWL is scaned in deep received, but none have reporteed this :(
No, it is not. Never was.
> > DNSWL for SA is implemented with first-trusted on all the tests in SA
> > I found. I don't see any deep-header parsing.
Yep.
> if its was we all need to use trusted_networks even more, its
> firstuntrusted, not first hop ;/
>
> whitelists should be fitsthop only, no ?
First *hop*? No. That's commonly some sender internal machine in the
case of spam. And a no-brainer to forge for spam.
> > > #6718 should have being resolved wont-fix
> > No, it was a duplicate complaint. Marking it a duplicate was
> > accurate IMO.
Indeed. A duplicate. No question at all.
> spamassassin is not a book of howto setup dns servers or is it now ?
Correct, it isn't. But it greatly benefits, and in quite some cases
requires setting one up.
Well, and an SMTP server or other glue software. SA ain't "a book of
howto setup" those either, is it? AKA, once again, I cannot follow you,
Benny. ;)
I highly welcome everyone to pay attention to the Subject. Then, after
writing whatever one feels to vent, and *before* sending, to carefully
and consciously re-read the Subject again.
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu\0.@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
