You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org> on 2007/03/13 16:03:40 UTC
Re: Spamassassin doesn't seem to obey my whitelist
John Rudd writes:
> Duane Hill wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Robert Swan wrote:
> >
> >> Richard the whitelist_from you are specifying as *@yahoogroups.com but
> >> if you look at the headers below, the email comes from :
> >>
>
> >
> > According to documentation:
> >
> > The headers checked for whitelist addresses are as follows: if
> > Resent-From is set, use that; otherwise check all addresses taken from
> > the following set of headers:
> >
> > Envelope-Sender
> > Resent-Sender
> > X-Envelope-From
> > From
> >
> > http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.1.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#whitelist_and_blacklist_options
> >
> >
>
>
> It doesn't check Return-Path as well?
>
> That seems rather inappropriate, since that's where the Envelope From is
> _supposed_ to be recorded. "We'll check a header that isn't standard
> (X-Envelope-From) for the envelope sender, but we wont check the
> _standard_ header for that information".
>
> That's just silly. And not in an entertaining way.
It does -- however the documentation forgot to mention it. fixed in 3.2.0.
--j.
RE: Spamassassin doesn't seem to obey my whitelist
Posted by Richard <rc...@aardvark.com.au>.
Hi Matt
Thanks for your response - and sorry for the delay. You may well be right. I
am using sa with sendmail - so perhaps sendmail is adding the Return-Path
after sa has done its bit. I note that the address which appears in the
"Return Path" comes from other fields in the header - namely:
Mailing-List: list OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com; contact
OziUsers-L-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com
List-Id: <OziUsers-L.yahoogroups.com>
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <ma...@yahoogroups.com>
Date: 12 Mar 2007 12:07:56 -0000
From: OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com
To: OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com
Should SA not use some of these fields to recognise a white listed address?
One other possibility is that the address in my white list is literally like
this:
[*@yahoogroups.com]
Complete with the square parenthesis. I am wondering whether the parenthesis
has confused the white list match. I have taken the parenthesis out to see
what happens. Any thoughts on this possibility?
Thanks again
Richard.
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:mkettler_sa@verizon.net]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 March 2007 10:52 PM
To: Richard
Subject: Re: Spamassassin doesn't seem to obey my whitelist
Richard wrote:
>> Justin was only mentioning it because a particular deficiency in the
>> *documentation* that came up in this thread was fixed in 3.2.0
>> (currently in devel).
>>
>
> OK. I had misunderstood. If it is only the *documentation* which is fixed
in
> 3.2.0 then do we understand why the email in my original posting was not
> being recognised as white listed?
>
Are you sure the Return-Path header was written at the time of scan?
Mind you that Return-Path isn't created at the time a message is sent,
it's created later.
RE: Spamassassin doesn't seem to obey my whitelist
Posted by Richard <rc...@aardvark.com.au>.
>Justin was only mentioning it because a particular deficiency in the
>*documentation* that came up in this thread was fixed in 3.2.0
>(currently in devel).
OK. I had misunderstood. If it is only the *documentation* which is fixed in
3.2.0 then do we understand why the email in my original posting was not
being recognised as white listed?
Going back to the original issue...
I have the following entry in my Webmin Spam-assassin table called:
"From: addresses to never classify as spam"
[*@yahoogroups.com]
I also have the following header info in an email conforming to this from
address:
Return-Path: <Oz...@yahoogroups.com>
X-Spam-Flag: YES
Should the Return-Path be recognised as a white list match? If so - do we
understand why it isn't happening here? If not - shouldn't it be?
Thanks to all who have commented so far...
Richard.
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:mkettler_sa@verizon.net]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 March 2007 11:46 AM
To: Richard
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Spamassassin doesn't seem to obey my whitelist
Richard wrote:
> Thanks all
>
> Sounds link I need to update to SA 3.2.0 or later. Normally I just wait
for
> updates to come through Centos update system (Up2date) - but perhaps I
> should give it a hurry on.
3.2.0 isn't released yet.
Justin was only mentioning it because a particular deficiency in the
*documentation* that came up in this thread was fixed in 3.2.0
(currently in devel).
Re: Spamassassin doesn't seem to obey my whitelist
Posted by Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>.
Richard wrote:
> Thanks all
>
> Sounds link I need to update to SA 3.2.0 or later. Normally I just wait for
> updates to come through Centos update system (Up2date) - but perhaps I
> should give it a hurry on.
3.2.0 isn't released yet.
Justin was only mentioning it because a particular deficiency in the
*documentation* that came up in this thread was fixed in 3.2.0
(currently in devel).
Re: Spamassassin doesn't seem to obey my whitelist
Posted by Theo Van Dinter <fe...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 11:16:34AM +0900, Richard wrote:
> Sounds link I need to update to SA 3.2.0 or later. Normally I just wait for
> updates to come through Centos update system (Up2date) - but perhaps I
> should give it a hurry on.
Testers welcome, just be aware that 3.2 hasn't been released yet.
> [root@aardvark-cs ~]# sa-update
> Can't locate Archive/Tar.pm in @INC (@INC contains:
You need to install the Archive::Tar perl module. See the INSTALL doc for
information about modules that are required.
> Will using sa-update interfere with the centos Up2Date system?
Nope.
--
Randomly Selected Tagline:
I am Chevy Chase of Borg, and you're not.
RE: Spamassassin doesn't seem to obey my whitelist
Posted by Richard <rc...@aardvark.com.au>.
Thanks all
Sounds link I need to update to SA 3.2.0 or later. Normally I just wait for
updates to come through Centos update system (Up2date) - but perhaps I
should give it a hurry on.
I tried running sa-update from my root login - but got errors. I'm afraid
I'm a bit clueless with all this command line stuff... Just a recently
reformed windows user. Can anyone tell me what is wrong here?:
[root@aardvark-cs ~]# sa-update
Can't locate Archive/Tar.pm in @INC (@INC contains:
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.5
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.5
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.4/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.3/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.2/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.1/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.4
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.3 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.2
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.1 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.4/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.3/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.2/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.4 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.3
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.2 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.0 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl) at
/usr/bin/sa-update line 94.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at /usr/bin/sa-update line 94.
[root@aardvark-cs ~]#
Will using sa-update interfere with the centos Up2Date system?
Thanks
Richard.
-----Original Message-----
From: jm@jmason.org [mailto:jm@jmason.org]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 March 2007 12:04 AM
To: John Rudd
Cc: Duane Hill; Robert Swan; Richard; users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Spamassassin doesn't seem to obey my whitelist
John Rudd writes:
> Duane Hill wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Robert Swan wrote:
> >
> >> Richard the whitelist_from you are specifying as *@yahoogroups.com but
> >> if you look at the headers below, the email comes from :
> >>
>
> >
> > According to documentation:
> >
> > The headers checked for whitelist addresses are as follows: if
> > Resent-From is set, use that; otherwise check all addresses taken
from
> > the following set of headers:
> >
> > Envelope-Sender
> > Resent-Sender
> > X-Envelope-From
> > From
> >
> >
http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.1.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#wh
itelist_and_blacklist_options
> >
> >
>
>
> It doesn't check Return-Path as well?
>
> That seems rather inappropriate, since that's where the Envelope From is
> _supposed_ to be recorded. "We'll check a header that isn't standard
> (X-Envelope-From) for the envelope sender, but we wont check the
> _standard_ header for that information".
>
> That's just silly. And not in an entertaining way.
It does -- however the documentation forgot to mention it. fixed in 3.2.0.
--j.