You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <sp...@dostech.ca> on 2010/11/21 03:50:48 UTC

DNSBL domain name change - c.anubisnetworks.com now wl/bl.mailspike.net

If you're rsyncing zones for Anubis' DNSBL you'll want to update your 
config for their new domains wl/bl.mailspike.net.

Daryl

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: svn commit: r1037373 - in 
/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami: 20_anubis.cf 20_mailspike.cf
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 02:44:17 -0000
From: dos@apache.org
Reply-To: SpamAssassin Dev <de...@spamassassin.apache.org>
To: commits@spamassassin.apache.org

Author: dos
Date: Sun Nov 21 02:44:17 2010
New Revision: 1037373

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1037373&view=rev
Log:
bug 6513: change anubis rules to new mailspike rules per their request

Added:
     spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami/20_mailspike.cf
       - copied, changed from r1037372, 
spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami/20_anubis.cf
Removed:
     spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami/20_anubis.cf

Copied: spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami/20_mailspike.cf (from 
r1037372, spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami/20_anubis.cf)
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami/20_mailspike.cf?p2=spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami/20_mailspike.cf&p1=spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami/20_anubis.cf&r1=1037372&r2=1037373&rev=1037373&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami/20_anubis.cf (original)
+++ spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/wtogami/20_mailspike.cf Sun Nov 
21 02:44:17 2010
@@ -1,43 +1,65 @@
-# Testing for masscheck testing only
+## Spam sources
+header __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_B	eval:check_rbl('mspikeb-lastexternal', 
'bl.mailspike.net.')
+tflags __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_B	net nopublish

-## Bad
-header __RCVD_IN_ANBREP 
eval:check_rbl('anubisrep-lastexternal', 'c.anubisnetworks.com.')
-tflags __RCVD_IN_ANBREP          net nopublish
-## Good
-header __RCVD_IN_ANBREP_F 
eval:check_rbl('anubisrep-firsttrusted', 'c.anubisnetworks.com.')
-tflags __RCVD_IN_ANBREP_F          net nopublish
+## Ham sources
+header __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L	eval:check_rbl('mspikeg-firsttrusted', 
'wl.mailspike.net.')
+tflags __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L	net nopublish

  ##### Reputation compensations
-# Definitions
-header RCVD_IN_ANBREP_Z 
eval:check_rbl_sub('anubisrep-lastexternal', '^127.0.0.2$')
-describe RCVD_IN_ANBREP_Z   Spam wave participant
-tflags RCVD_IN_ANBREP_Z     net nopublish
-header RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L5 
eval:check_rbl_sub('anubisrep-lastexternal', '^127.0.0.10$')
-describe RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L5   Very bad reputation (-5)
-tflags RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L5     net nopublish
-header RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L4 
eval:check_rbl_sub('anubisrep-lastexternal', '^127.0.0.11$')
-describe RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L4   Bad reputation (-4)
-tflags RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L4     net nopublish
-header RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L3 
eval:check_rbl_sub('anubisrep-lastexternal', '^127.0.0.12$')
-describe RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L3   Low reputation (-3)
-tflags RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L3     net nopublish
-header RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L2 
eval:check_rbl_sub('anubisrep-lastexternal', '^127.0.0.13$')
-describe RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L2   Suspicious sender (-2)
-tflags RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L2     net nopublish
-header RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H2 
eval:check_rbl_sub('anubisrep-firsttrusted', '^127.0.0.17$')
-describe RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H2   Average reputation sender (2)
-tflags RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H2     net nice nopublish
-header RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H3 
eval:check_rbl_sub('anubisrep-firsttrusted', '^127.0.0.18$')
-describe RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H3   Good reputation sender (3)
-tflags RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H3     net nice nopublish
-header RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H4 
eval:check_rbl_sub('anubisrep-firsttrusted', '^127.0.0.19$')
-describe RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H4   High reputation sender (4)
-tflags RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H4     net nice nopublish
-header RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H5 
eval:check_rbl_sub('anubisrep-firsttrusted', '^127.0.0.20$')
-describe RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H5   Excelent reputation sender (5)
-tflags RCVD_IN_ANBREP_H5     net nice nopublish
-
-# Blacklist Composite
-meta     RCVD_IN_ANBREP_BL   RCVD_IN_ANBREP_Z || RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L5 || 
RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L4 || RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L3
-describe RCVD_IN_ANBREP_BL   Anubis Blacklisted
-tflags   RCVD_IN_ANBREP_BL   net nopublish
+# Definitions - Bad senders
+header __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_Z	eval:check_rbl_sub('mspikeb-lastexternal', 
'^127\.0\.0\.2$')
+describe __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_Z	Spam wave participant
+tflags __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_Z	net nopublish
+
+header RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L5	eval:check_rbl_sub('mspikeb-lastexternal', 
'^127\.0\.0\.10$')
+describe RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L5	Very bad reputation (-5)
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L5	net nopublish
+
+header RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L4	eval:check_rbl_sub('mspikeb-lastexternal', 
'^127\.0\.0\.11$')
+describe RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L4	Bad reputation (-4)
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L4	net nopublish
+
+header RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L3	eval:check_rbl_sub('mspikeb-lastexternal', 
'^127\.0\.0\.12$')
+describe RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L3	Low reputation (-3)
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L3	net nopublish
+
+header RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L2	eval:check_rbl_sub('mspikeb-lastexternal', 
'^127\.0\.0\.13$')
+describe RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L2	Suspicious reputation (-2)
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L2	net nopublish
+
+# Definitions - Good senders
+header RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5	eval:check_rbl_sub('mspikeg-firsttrusted', 
'^127\.0\.0\.20$')
+describe RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5	Excellent reputation (+5)
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5	nice net nopublish
+
+header RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4	eval:check_rbl_sub('mspikeg-firsttrusted', 
'^127\.0\.0\.19$')
+describe RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4	Very Good reputation (+4)
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4	nice net nopublish
+
+header RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3	eval:check_rbl_sub('mspikeg-firsttrusted', 
'^127\.0\.0\.18$')
+describe RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3	Good reputation (+3)
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3	nice net nopublish
+
+header RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2	eval:check_rbl_sub('mspikeg-firsttrusted', 
'^127\.0\.0\.17$')
+describe RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2	Average reputation (+2)
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2	nice net nopublish
+
+# *_L and *_Z may overlap each other, so account for that
+meta __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_LOW	RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L5 || RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L4 || 
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L3
+tflags __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_LOW	net nopublish
+
+meta RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_ZBI		__RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_Z && !__RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_LOW
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_ZBI	net nopublish
+
+## Meta rules for aggregating good and bad senders
+# Bad
+meta RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL		RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L5 || RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L4 || 
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L3 || __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_Z
+describe RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL	Mailspike blacklisted
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL	net nopublish
+
+# Good
+meta RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL		RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5 || RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4 || 
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3
+describe RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL	Mailspike good senders
+tflags RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL	nice net nopublish
+