Re: False DENIED_SENDER_NO_MX error?

Hi Sam,

Can you release a patch for these bugs asap? I have been waiting for this fix 
for so long. Thanks.

Re: False DENIED_SENDER_NO_MX error?

I've got a patch ready that fixes a couple of outstanding issues, 
including the DENIED_SENDER_NO_MX problem.  I still need to make a 
couple of other changes and finish testing.

I'm sorry the fixes have taken so long, but I've had very little free 
time for spamdyke lately.  I'll try to get everything wrapped up and 
released within the next week.

-- Sam Clippinger

On 5/6/11 4:10 AM, Chris wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> Can you release a patch for these bugs asap? I have been waiting for this fix
> for so long. Thanks.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spamdyke-users mailing list
> spamdyke-users@...
> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
>    

Spamdyke!

Sam - we all have to earn a living and know that Spamdyke is a labor 
of love-alone for you (and for US!!!)

We all appreciate to the tips of our toes, what you've created here.

Thank you very much!

On 5/6/2011 11:00 AM, spamdyke-users-request@... wrote:
> I'm sorry the fixes have taken so long, but I've had very little free
> time for spamdyke lately.  I'll try to get everything wrapped up and
> released within the next week.

Re: greeting-delay-seconds and whitelists

Actually, it already does this for IP- and rDNS-based whitelists.  
Obviously it can't skip the delay for sender- and recipient-based 
whitelists, since it doesn't have enough information to match the 
whitelist until the greeting has already taken place.

-- Sam Clippinger

On 4/25/11 3:07 AM, Ulrich C. Manns | msp-it wrote:
> Is it possible first to check the whitelists before the greeting-delay starts in the next version?
>
> I have some websites scripts, which can't send emails when the greeting-delay is activated.
>
> Regards,
> Ulrich
>
>    
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spamdyke-users mailing list
> spamdyke-users@...
> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
>    

RBL checking

Hello,

I uinderstand that spamdyke's RBL checking is fundamentally different
to the system that RBLSMTPD uses in that spamdyke checks for any
record whereas RBLSMTPD checks only for a TXT record.

Were I to use spamdyke then IPs would be blocked that I wish to accept
but spamassassin score as past offenders like this one for example-

 dig 23.114.74.212.rbl.holtain.net txt

; <<>> DiG 9.5.2 <<>> 23.114.74.212.rbl.holtain.net txt
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 4354
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;23.114.74.212.rbl.holtain.net. IN      TXT

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
rbl.holtain.net.        3600    IN      SOA     ns2.holtain.net. niamh.holtain.net. 1305045513 7200 7200 604800 3600

dig 23.114.74.212.rbl.holtain.net a

; <<>> DiG 9.5.2 <<>> 23.114.74.212.rbl.holtain.net a
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 8550

Re: RBL checking

So you want to accept RBL entries that have A records but not TXT 
records, then use SpamAssassin to score them higher?  Interesting.

With spamdyke, you could still do this.  Normally it checks for both A 
and TXT records, but you can use the "dns-query-type-rbl" option to only 
check TXT records.  Then keep your existing SpamAssassin configuration 
to put the higher score on messages that have A records on the RBL.
     http://www.spamdyke.org/documentation/README.html#DNS_QUERIES
Note, however, that some RBLs only use A records, so using this option 
will render those RBLs useless.

-- Sam Clippinger

On 5/10/11 12:27 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I uinderstand that spamdyke's RBL checking is fundamentally different
> to the system that RBLSMTPD uses in that spamdyke checks for any
> record whereas RBLSMTPD checks only for a TXT record.
>
> Were I to use spamdyke then IPs would be blocked that I wish to accept
> but spamassassin score as past offenders like this one for example-
>
>   dig 23.114.74.212.rbl.holtain.net txt
>
> ;<<>>  DiG 9.5.2<<>>  23.114.74.212.rbl.holtain.net txt
> ;; global options:  printcmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 4354

Re: RBL checking

Hello Sam,

Tuesday, May 10, 2011, 7:34:59 PM, you wrote:

SC> Interesting.

Does the server hosting this list run spamdyke?

If it does its overenthusiastic rejection of messages is a poor advert
for spamdyke; I'm trying to send this message via gmail in the hopes
it will get through!

------------------------------------------------------
<spamdyke-users@...>:
208.110.65.146 does not like recipient.
Remote host said: 554 Refused. Your domain name is blacklisted. See: http://iconoclast.silence.org/policy/index.html#DENIED_BLACKLIST_NAME
Giving up on 208.110.65.146.

--

-- 
Best regards,
 Niamh                            mailto:niamh@...

Re: RBL checking

Since I finished sending you a private email about this before I saw 
this posting, I'll just quote my response here:
.....
I have a script running on my server that automatically examines the 
websites on incoming mail servers and blacklists anything that looks 
suspicious.  This is amazingly effective, since spammers will buy 
hundreds of domains and use the exact same website on each one.  When it 
checked your server (holtain.net), it found the Fedora Core Test Page 
and blocked it.

Sorry for the false positive.  I've removed the blacklist entry and 
changed the script so it won't blacklist your domain again.
.....

As for my mail server being a poor advertisement for spamdyke, I 
respectfully disagree.  My email address has existed since 1997 and it's 
listed many places where spammers can easily find it (web pages, mailing 
list archives, forums, etc).  In other words, I'm on plenty of spam 
lists.  But thanks to spamdyke and my filtering scripts, I typically get 
2-3 spam emails per day.

So once more, I'm sorry your email was blocked but false positives are 
unavoidable in the anti-spam business.  You're no longer blocked and 
shouldn't have any more problems.

-- Sam Clippinger

On 5/11/11 9:12 AM, Niamh Holding wrote:
> Hello Sam,
>

Re: RBL checking

>From my own point of view, as many people have done before, I would like to
THANK YOU Sam very sincerely and deeply for Spamdyke and the work that you
have always put in to it for the benefit of us all.  Your dedication,
patience and help are amazing and appreciated.

On a related issue, would you be prepared to let us have a copy of the
script you use to check the websites of incoming mail servers.  And are you
saying that if I purchase mytestaccount.com and send an email with
incoming/outgoing mail servers as mail.mytestaccount.com and do NOT have a
website www.mytestaccount.com then your script would blacklist that email?
I can envisage this being a fairly common scenario when people want personal
email but no website so the website would be the default.

Kind regards, 
 

Re: RBL checking

Hello Christoph,

Wednesday, May 11, 2011, 4:07:28 PM, you wrote:

CK> I can envisage this being a fairly common scenario when people want personal
CK> email but no website so the website would be the default.

Or even set up a masiil server before a website. It seems a guaranteed
way to get a lot of false positives.

Further the message is totally misleading-

"Refused. Your domain name is blacklisted.

You (or someone else) have sent us so much spam that we've added your
domain name to our blacklist. Sorry about that, but we've had enough and we don't know what else to do. "

When in fact the blacklist has been applied for not having a website,
even when no spam has been received at all.
--

-- 
Best regards,
 Niamh                            mailto:niamh@...

_______________________________________________
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@...
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users