You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Kiran Awad <k....@qualityg.com> on 2008/10/03 13:32:18 UTC
Help Required
Hi,
We are having an ERP server which broadcasts email to various users on daily
basis, We are facing problem that email sent by these particular email id
doesn't get delivered to users. Below is log on mail server
Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg sendmail[5046]: m8UFJ1jx005046:
from=it@qualityg.com, size=2853, class=0, nrcpts=2,
msgid=<20...@qualityg.com>, proto=ESMTP, daemon=MTA,
relay=[192.168.1.50]
Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: connection from qualityg.com
[127.0.0.1] at port 32930
Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: setuid to root succeeded
Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: still running as root: user not
specified with -u, not found, or set to root, falling back to nobody
Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: processing message
<20...@qualityg.com> for root:99
Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: auto-whitelist: open of auto-whitelist
file failed: locker: safe_lock: cannot create tmp lockfile
/.spamassassin/auto-whitelist.lock.qualityg.com.2851 for
/.spamassassin/auto-whitelist.lock: No such file or directory
Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: identified spam (6.0/5.0) for
root:99 in 0.2 seconds, 3201 bytes.
Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: result: Y 6 -
ALL_TRUSTED,HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HEADER_CTYPE_ONLY,MIME_HTML_ONLY,TVD_RCVD_IP,T
VD_RCVD_IP4
scantime=0.2,size=3201,user=root,uid=99,required_score=5.0,rhost=qualityg.co
m,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=32930,mid=<20...@qualityg.com>
,autolearn=no
Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2842]: prefork: child states: II
Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg sendmail[5047]: m8UFJ1jx005046:
to=r.sharma@qualityg.com, ctladdr=it@qualityg.com (500/502), delay=00:00:00,
xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=local, pri=63158, dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent
Please if anyone can analyse where is problem lying and give me solution.
Best Regards,
Kiran
P Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
Re: Help Required
Posted by John Hardin <jh...@impsec.org>.
On Fri, 3 Oct 2008, Kiran Awad wrote:
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: result: Y 6 -
> ALL_TRUSTED,HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HEADER_CTYPE_ONLY,MIME_HTML_ONLY,TVD_RCVD_IP,TVD_RCVD_IP4
You can avoid MIME_HTML_ONLY by including a plain-text alternative version
of your newsletter in the email. Bear in mind, not everyone uses (or
likes) HTML email - be considerate of those people.
MIME_HEADER_CTYPE_ONLY means you're not generating the message's MIME
headers correctly. Adding a plain text alternative body part may fix that
without having to do anything else.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin@impsec.org FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Individual liberties are always "loopholes" to absolute authority.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
32 days until the Presidential Election
Re: Help Required
Posted by mouss <mo...@netoyen.net>.
Kiran Awad wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> We are having an ERP server which broadcasts email to various users on daily
> basis, We are facing problem that email sent by these particular email id
> doesn't get delivered to users. Below is log on mail server
>
>
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg sendmail[5046]: m8UFJ1jx005046:
> from=it@qualityg.com, size=2853, class=0, nrcpts=2,
> msgid=<20...@qualityg.com>, proto=ESMTP, daemon=MTA,
> relay=[192.168.1.50]
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: connection from qualityg.com
> [127.0.0.1] at port 32930
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: setuid to root succeeded
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: still running as root: user not
> specified with -u, not found, or set to root, falling back to nobody
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: processing message
> <20...@qualityg.com> for root:99
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: auto-whitelist: open of auto-whitelist
> file failed: locker: safe_lock: cannot create tmp lockfile
> /.spamassassin/auto-whitelist.lock.qualityg.com.2851 for
> /.spamassassin/auto-whitelist.lock: No such file or directory
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: identified spam (6.0/5.0) for
> root:99 in 0.2 seconds, 3201 bytes.
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: result: Y 6 -
> ALL_TRUSTED,HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HEADER_CTYPE_ONLY,MIME_HTML_ONLY,TVD_RCVD_IP,T
> VD_RCVD_IP4
> scantime=0.2,size=3201,user=root,uid=99,required_score=5.0,rhost=qualityg.co
> m,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=32930,mid=<20...@qualityg.com>
> ,autolearn=no
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2842]: prefork: child states: II
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg sendmail[5047]: m8UFJ1jx005046:
> to=r.sharma@qualityg.com, ctladdr=it@qualityg.com (500/502), delay=00:00:00,
> xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=local, pri=63158, dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent
>
>
>
>
>
> Please if anyone can analyse where is problem lying and give me solution.
>
It looks like your application uses a borked HELO. show a sample message
to confirm that. Note also that it not a good idea to send html only mail.
Re: Help Required
Posted by David B Funk <db...@engineering.uiowa.edu>.
On Fri, 3 Oct 2008, Kiran Awad wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> We are having an ERP server which broadcasts email to various users on daily
> basis, We are facing problem that email sent by these particular email id
> doesn't get delivered to users. Below is log on mail server
>
>
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg sendmail[5046]: m8UFJ1jx005046:
> from=it@qualityg.com, size=2853, class=0, nrcpts=2,
> msgid=<20...@qualityg.com>, proto=ESMTP, daemon=MTA,
> relay=[192.168.1.50]
>
[snip..]
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: identified spam (6.0/5.0) for
> root:99 in 0.2 seconds, 3201 bytes.
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2851]: spamd: result: Y 6 -
> ALL_TRUSTED,HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HEADER_CTYPE_ONLY,MIME_HTML_ONLY,TVD_RCVD_IP,T
> VD_RCVD_IP4
> scantime=0.2,size=3201,user=root,uid=99,required_score=5.0,rhost=qualityg.co
> m,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=32930,mid=<20...@qualityg.com>
> ,autolearn=no
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg spamd[2842]: prefork: child states: II
>
> Sep 30 18:19:01 qualityg sendmail[5047]: m8UFJ1jx005046:
> to=r.sharma@qualityg.com, ctladdr=it@qualityg.com (500/502), delay=00:00:00,
> xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=local, pri=63158, dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent
>
>
> Please if anyone can analyse where is problem lying and give me solution.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Kiran
You have two different problems here.
1) that message was scored as spam, why? That "spamd: result" log line
says that message scored at 6, but the rules hit don't add up to 6, except
for that last rule TVD_RCVD_IP4. The spamassassin rules database claims
that rule should never hit ham. So either there's a bug in their rules or
your mail system is creating a strange 'Received:' header that they only
ever see in spam.
You can either:
1) try to fix the mail system to not create that strange 'Received:'
header.
2) If it's a legit system, report it as a bug to the spamassasin bugzilla
including some examples of your messages.
3) Locally drop the score for that rule.
4) (Best choice) Change your mail system so that internally generated
mail is not passed to spamassasin. (IE don't scan local mail at all).
2) There is some kind of real problem with your mail system
delivery/reporting mechanism. You say "email sent by these particular
email id doesn't get delivered to users" However looking at that
last sendmail log entry it clearly says "mailer=local, pri=63158,
dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent" Which means that as far as the mail system is
concerned that message was successfully delivered. So either your mail
system is lying or something is breaking after the delivery process.
Either way you need to investigate this problem.
--
Dave Funk University of Iowa
<dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.edu> College of Engineering
319/335-5751 FAX: 319/384-0549 1256 Seamans Center
Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_admin Iowa City, IA 52242-1527
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{
Re: Help Required
Posted by Kai Schaetzl <ma...@conactive.com>.
Kenneth Porter wrote on Fri, 03 Oct 2008 12:45:36 -0700:
> This would be my guess. It would make sense to email status in much the way
> a revision control server would email commit notices.
Ok, I then wipe the "neither" ;-) Thanks.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Re: Help Required
Posted by Kenneth Porter <sh...@sewingwitch.com>.
On Friday, October 03, 2008 9:31 PM +0200 Kai Schaetzl
<ma...@conactive.com> wrote:
> I figure it's neither
> Enterprise resource planning,
This would be my guess. It would make sense to email status in much the way
a revision control server would email commit notices.
Because such information might be table-heavy, it looks like one of the few
situations where HTML makes sense. But I'd still include a stub text
alternative with a link to web-based content.
Re: Help Required
Posted by Kai Schaetzl <ma...@conactive.com>.
Kiran Awad wrote on Fri, 3 Oct 2008 14:32:18 +0300:
> ERP server
what the heck is an ERP server?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ERP
I figure it's neither
Enterprise resource planning,
nor
Erotic Role-playing, ?
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com