You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Steven Stern <su...@sterndata.com> on 2004/11/14 03:06:58 UTC
Errors at RBLs
What's the best way to clear the name of an important web site?
Why are these RBLs listing redhat.com?
Content analysis details: (8.3 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
2.0 URIBL_PH_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the PH SURBL blocklist
[URIs: redhat.com]
1.5 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist
[URIs: redhat.com]
3.2 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the OB SURBL blocklist
[URIs: redhat.com]
4.3 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist
[URIs: redhat.com]
--
Steve
Re: Errors at RBLs
Posted by Jeff Chan <je...@surbl.org>.
On Saturday, November 13, 2004, 6:20:40 PM, Steven Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:11:11 -0800, Jeff Chan <je...@surbl.org> wrote:
>>However redhat.com is not on any SURBLs. Perhaps we should ask
>>you to give some debugging info to the developers?
> I'd be happy to. What information is relevant?
> Using SA 3.0.1 on FC3 with no additional rulesets added.
Probably the message and full system information.
(I'm not one of the SA developers.... ;-)
Jeff C.
--
Jeff Chan
mailto:jeffc@surbl.org
http://www.surbl.org/
Re: Errors at RBLs
Posted by Steven Stern <su...@sterndata.com>.
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:11:11 -0800, Jeff Chan <je...@surbl.org> wrote:
>However redhat.com is not on any SURBLs. Perhaps we should ask
>you to give some debugging info to the developers?
I'd be happy to. What information is relevant?
Using SA 3.0.1 on FC3 with no additional rulesets added.
--
Steve
Re: Errors at RBLs
Posted by Jeff Chan <je...@surbl.org>.
On Saturday, November 13, 2004, 6:06:58 PM, Steven Stern wrote:
> What's the best way to clear the name of an important web site?
Send a note to whitelist@surbl.org or the source list as
described at:
http://www.surbl.org/lists.html
> Why are these RBLs listing redhat.com?
> Content analysis details: (8.3 points, 5.0 required)
> pts rule name description
> ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
> -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
> [score: 0.0000]
> 2.0 URIBL_PH_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the PH SURBL blocklist
> [URIs: redhat.com]
> 1.5 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist
> [URIs: redhat.com]
> 3.2 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the OB SURBL blocklist
> [URIs: redhat.com]
> 4.3 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist
> [URIs: redhat.com]
However redhat.com is not on any SURBLs. Perhaps we should ask
you to give some debugging info to the developers?
Jeff C.
--
Jeff Chan
mailto:jeffc@surbl.org
http://www.surbl.org/