You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@spamassassin.apache.org by jm...@apache.org on 2006/07/04 11:26:33 UTC
svn commit: r418961 - /spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/jm/20_dob.cf
Author: jm
Date: Tue Jul 4 02:26:32 2006
New Revision: 418961
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=418961&view=rev
Log:
should really get these Day-Old-Bread rules into the sandbox for mass-checking. are these ok to publish?
Added:
spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/jm/20_dob.cf
Added: spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/jm/20_dob.cf
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/jm/20_dob.cf?rev=418961&view=auto
==============================================================================
--- spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/jm/20_dob.cf (added)
+++ spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/jm/20_dob.cf Tue Jul 4 02:26:32 2006
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+
+
+header __RCVD_IN_DOB eval:check_rbl('dob', 'dob.sibl.support-intelligence.net.', '255')
+describe __RCVD_IN_DOB Received via relay in new domain (Day Old Bread)
+tflags __RCVD_IN_DOB net
+
+header RCVD_IN_DOB eval:check_rbl_sub('dob', '127.0.0.2')
+describe RCVD_IN_DOB Received via relay in new domain (Day Old Bread)
+tflags RCVD_IN_DOB net
+
+header DNS_FROM_DOB eval:check_rbl_envfrom('dob','dob.sibl.support-intelligence.net.')
+describe DNS_FROM_DOB Sender from new domain (Day Old Bread)
+tflags DNS_FROM_DOB net
+
+ifplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL
+urirhssub URIBL_RHS_DOB dob.sibl.support-intelligence.net A 2
+body URIBL_RHS_DOB eval:check_uridnsbl('URIBL_RHS_DOB')
+describe URIBL_RHS_DOB Contains an URI of a new domain (Day Old Bread)
+tflags URIBL_RHS_DOB net
+endif
+
+
Re: svn commit: r418961 - /spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/jm/20_dob.cf
Posted by Michael Parker <pa...@pobox.com>.
jm@apache.org wrote:
> Author: jm
> Date: Tue Jul 4 02:26:32 2006
> New Revision: 418961
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=418961&view=rev
> Log:
> should really get these Day-Old-Bread rules into the sandbox for mass-checking. are these ok to publish?
>
For sure they are gonna have to be reuse rules.
Michael