You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by bu...@issues.apache.org on 2011/03/08 21:54:54 UTC
[Bug 6550] New: Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Summary: Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Product: Spamassassin
Version: SVN Trunk (Latest Devel Version)
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Rules
AssignedTo: dev@spamassassin.apache.org
ReportedBy: Darxus@ChaosReigns.com
CC: Darxus@ChaosReigns.com
Looks like the rule should be:
urirhssub URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR dbl.spamhaus.org. A 127.0.1.3
body URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR
eval:check_uridnsbl('URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR')
describe URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR Contains a URL listed in the DBL as a
spammed redirector domain
tflags URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR net domains_only
http://www.spamhaus.org/faq/answers.lasso?section=Spamhaus%20DBL#291
http://www.spamhaus.org/news.lasso?article=667
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/201103.mbox/%3C4D768A55.20701@inetmsg.com%3E
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
--- Comment #18 from Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> 2011-11-03 19:25:05 UTC ---
Reopening so we can make sure to check the results of the rule and consider
uncapping it in 50_score.cf.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #19 from Darxus <Da...@ChaosReigns.com> 2011-11-28 18:45:34 UTC ---
MSECS SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME WHO/AGE
0 1.6633 0.1554 0.915 0.73 0.00 URIBL_DBL_REDIR
>From the latest net run:
http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?daterev=20111126&rule=%2Furibl_dbl
And that's without the reuse flag.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|3.4.0 |3.4.1
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #11 from Warren Togami <wt...@gmail.com> 2011-06-09 21:50:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Certainly no objection to renaming. Do I need to modify the patch?
>
> Tbat's 3 votes, and 3.3.2 has been tagged and tarred, so... this should be
> committed?
What does voting and 3.3.2 have to do with a test rule for masschecks? trunk
is masschecks. No voting is required. The general consensus we agreed on
maybe a year or two is "plenty of advance warning and no complaints" to add new
network rules to the weekly masscheck.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Darxus <Da...@ChaosReigns.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #4874|0 |1
is obsolete| |
--- Comment #16 from Darxus <Da...@ChaosReigns.com> 2011-10-28 17:37:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 4990
--> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/attachment.cgi?id=4990
Patch with REDIRECTOR changed to REDIR
This has had way more approval than needed, and I was told I didn't need to
make the change from "REDIRECTOR" to "REDIR", but here it is. Please commit.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@issues.apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Jeff Chan <je...@surbl.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jeffc@surbl.org
--- Comment #3 from Jeff Chan <je...@surbl.org> 2011-03-09 02:14:05 EST ---
The DBL redirector list includes things like bit.ly (which admittedly is highly
abused, especially after they stopped using SURBL), so I suspect this rule will
end up with a fairly low score in the automated score generation.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Darxus <Da...@ChaosReigns.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|Add DBL spammed redirector |[review] Add DBL spammed
|to weekly masschecks |redirector to weekly
| |masschecks
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@issues.apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #5 from Warren Togami <wt...@gmail.com> 2011-03-09 07:57:01 EST ---
I can confirm that I do indeed see many bit.ly abuses in spam. I don't know
when it began, but a few months ago I don't recall seeing any of this. It
would seem very unwise of them to stop using SURBL. It sounds like shooting
themselves in the foot.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@issues.apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #4 from Jeff Chan <je...@surbl.org> 2011-03-09 02:15:32 EST ---
To answer Warren's question more directly, DBL redirector list is a domain
blacklist used against URIs, so it is as much of a URIBL as DBL is.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@issues.apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #2 from Warren Togami <wt...@gmail.com> 2011-03-08 16:05:54 EST ---
Are we already querying DBL in another rule? We can reuse that query. This is
only a new return code. It actually is nothing special because it's only
looking up the rightmost side of the domain, not the entire shortener including
the pathname which is where specific spam URL's live. Also keep in mind that
ordinary URIBL's can list an evil shortener.
Is DBL's shortener identification meant to be a lower score than a URIBL
listing?
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Severity|blocker |major
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #13 from Warren Togami <wt...@gmail.com> 2011-06-09 22:05:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > What does voting and 3.3.2 have to do with a test rule for masschecks? trunk
> > is masschecks. No voting is required. The general consensus we agreed on
> > maybe a year or two is "plenty of advance warning and no complaints" to add new
> > network rules to the weekly masscheck.
>
> So commit it?
Not yet. See below.
(In reply to comment #6)
>
> And Warren, the way urirhssub works, this won't cause an additional DNS query:
Take a look at rules/25_uribl.cf where the existing URIBL_DBL_* rules live. It
appears that URIBL_DBL_* should have the "reuse" flag like the other production
URIBL rules.
I normally wouldn't suggest this, but given that this is another return code
for an existing network query, we might be better off immediately putting it
into production alongside the other URIBL_DBL_* rules with an informational
score, then make it "reuse" so it does not differ from the other rules and
trigger extra DNS lookups during masscheck.
I believe this is a better way of more accurately testing the performance of
URIBL_DBL_REDIR and the existing DBL return codes, because we are better off
knowing its performance AT THE TIME OF MAIL DELIVERY rather than weeks/months
later.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #12 from Darxus <Da...@ChaosReigns.com> 2011-06-09 21:55:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> What does voting and 3.3.2 have to do with a test rule for masschecks? trunk
> is masschecks. No voting is required. The general consensus we agreed on
> maybe a year or two is "plenty of advance warning and no complaints" to add new
> network rules to the weekly masscheck.
So commit it?
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #10 from Darxus <Da...@ChaosReigns.com> 2011-06-09 14:32:51 UTC ---
Certainly no objection to renaming. Do I need to modify the patch?
Tbat's 3 votes, and 3.3.2 has been tagged and tarred, so... this should be
committed?
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #17 from Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si> 2011-10-28 19:14:13 UTC ---
> This has had way more approval than needed, and I was told I didn't need to
> make the change from "REDIRECTOR" to "REDIR", but here it is. Please commit.
trunk:
Bug 6550: Add DBL spammed redirector - rule URIBL_DBL_REDIR
Sending rules/25_uribl.cf
Sending rules/50_scores.cf
Committed revision 1190507.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #20 from Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> 2011-12-13 19:00:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> MSECS SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME WHO/AGE
> 0 1.6633 0.1554 0.915 0.73 0.00 URIBL_DBL_REDIR
>
> From the latest net run:
> http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?daterev=20111126&rule=%2Furibl_dbl
> And that's without the reuse flag.
AXB and I discussed this.
This rule is not an indicator of spam. It's an indicator of a redirector.
Change the description to describe DBL_REDIR INFO:Contains URL shortener and
hopefully some other people can use this in Meta's to try and build on it.
By itself, this rule isn't worthy of scoring but some admins may want to score
it higher if they despise redirectors.
Mark, your thoughts since you checked it in originally?
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |kmcgrail@pccc.com
--- Comment #7 from Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> 2011-05-09 13:23:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Created attachment 4874 [details]
> Patch
>
> Adds URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR to rules/25_uribl.cf and rules/50_scores.cf. I was
> thinking about creating a sandbox, but it's just another return value for an
> already queried zone.
>
> And Warren, the way urirhssub works, this won't cause an additional DNS query:
> http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.3.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Plugin_URIDNSBL.html#item_urirhssub_name_of_rule_rhsbl_zone_lookuptype_subte
+1 to test it out.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|3.3.3 |3.4.0
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
Re: [Bug 6550] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by "Lawrence @ Rogers" <la...@nl.rogers.com>.
On 08/03/2011 5:31 PM, bugzilla-daemon@issues.apache.org wrote:
> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
>
> AXB<ax...@gmail.com> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CC| |axb.lists@gmail.com
>
> --- Comment #1 from AXB<ax...@gmail.com> 2011-03-08 16:01:14 EST ---
> (In reply to comment #0)
>> Looks like the rule should be:
>>
>> urirhssub URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR dbl.spamhaus.org. A 127.0.1.3
>> body URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR
>> eval:check_uridnsbl('URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR')
>> describe URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR Contains a URL listed in the DBL as a
>> spammed redirector domain
>> tflags URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR net domains_only
>>
>>
>> http://www.spamhaus.org/faq/answers.lasso?section=Spamhaus%20DBL#291
>> http://www.spamhaus.org/news.lasso?article=667
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/201103.mbox/%3C4D768A55.20701@inetmsg.com%3E
> afaik, its missing the "if can"
>
> if can(Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL::has_tflags_domains_only)
> urirhssub URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR dbl.spamhaus.org. A 127.0.1.3
> body URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR
> eval:check_uridnsbl('URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR')
> describe URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR Contains a URL listed in the DBL as a
> spammed redirector domain
> tflags URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR net domains_only
> endif
>
> to avoid queries for IPs and get the 255
>
Yup you are right.
Regards,
Lawrence
[Bug 6550] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@issues.apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
AXB <ax...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |axb.lists@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from AXB <ax...@gmail.com> 2011-03-08 16:01:14 EST ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Looks like the rule should be:
>
> urirhssub URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR dbl.spamhaus.org. A 127.0.1.3
> body URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR
> eval:check_uridnsbl('URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR')
> describe URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR Contains a URL listed in the DBL as a
> spammed redirector domain
> tflags URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR net domains_only
>
>
> http://www.spamhaus.org/faq/answers.lasso?section=Spamhaus%20DBL#291
> http://www.spamhaus.org/news.lasso?article=667
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/201103.mbox/%3C4D768A55.20701@inetmsg.com%3E
afaik, its missing the "if can"
if can(Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL::has_tflags_domains_only)
urirhssub URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR dbl.spamhaus.org. A 127.0.1.3
body URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR
eval:check_uridnsbl('URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR')
describe URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR Contains a URL listed in the DBL as a
spammed redirector domain
tflags URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR net domains_only
endif
to avoid queries for IPs and get the 255
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #6 from Darxus <Da...@ChaosReigns.com> 2011-05-05 21:12:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 4874
--> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/attachment.cgi?id=4874
Patch
Adds URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR to rules/25_uribl.cf and rules/50_scores.cf. I was
thinking about creating a sandbox, but it's just another return value for an
already queried zone.
And Warren, the way urirhssub works, this won't cause an additional DNS query:
http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.3.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Plugin_URIDNSBL.html#item_urirhssub_name_of_rule_rhsbl_zone_lookuptype_subte
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #14 from Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si> 2011-06-09 22:20:12 UTC ---
> Certainly no objection to renaming. Do I need to modify the patch?
No need, it's just a cosmetic change.
> What does voting and 3.3.2 have to do with a test rule for masschecks?
Not necessary, but it can't hurt to hear a general approval.
> I normally wouldn't suggest this, but given that this is another return code
> for an existing network query, we might be better off immediately putting it
> into production alongside the other URIBL_DBL_* rules with an informational
> score, then make it "reuse" so it does not differ from the other rules and
> trigger extra DNS lookups during masscheck.
Sure. As far as I'm concerned, just commit it.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
--- Comment #15 from Warren Togami <wt...@gmail.com> 2011-06-09 22:53:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> > I normally wouldn't suggest this, but given that this is another return code
> > for an existing network query, we might be better off immediately putting it
> > into production alongside the other URIBL_DBL_* rules with an informational
> > score, then make it "reuse" so it does not differ from the other rules and
> > trigger extra DNS lookups during masscheck.
>
> Sure. As far as I'm concerned, just commit it.
My mistake. I looked at Darxus' proposed patch and it already does this. Just
need to rename to REDIR and add reuse to all three and it'll be good to go.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Sidney Markowitz <si...@sidney.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |sidney@sidney.com
--- Comment #8 from Sidney Markowitz <si...@sidney.com> 2011-06-04 04:36:18 UTC ---
+1 to add it to masscheck to try it out, but what about a CLA?
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|Undefined |3.3.3
--- Comment #9 from Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si> 2011-06-09 09:24:18 UTC ---
+1, a useful rule.
Occasionally it does fire on legitimate mail, but more often
it is one of the very few rules hitting on a sex spam
(just checked the log of the first 9 days of the June mail,
it hit on 910 messages). It is certainly worth a couple of
spam score points, I have it at 2.0 and it seems about right.
I'd just shorten its name (occupying valuable space in the log),
perhaps URIBL_DBL_REDIRECTOR -> URIBL_DBL_REDIR.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 6550] [review] Add DBL spammed redirector to weekly masschecks
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6550
Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Severity|normal |blocker
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.