Re: What was SA thinking?
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 17:20:47 +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 09.01.07 09:58, Steve Lamb wrote:
>> Recently a ton of mail running through SA has been hitting the soft-limit
>> for spam. I have it set tight, 5.0 for mark and pass. 7.0 for reject at
>> SMTP. Mail from this list, from Exim's list, mail from an MMORPG I play and
>> from a motorcycle web site I went to all got blocked. Ok, so maybe someone
>> got pissed at the MMORPG and Motorcycle site, but Debian and Exim!? Here's
>> the snippet of score from the latest exim mail to be blocked:
>>
>> * 2.8 URIBL_PH_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the PH SURBL blocklist
>> * [URIs: exim.org computurn.com eiffel.com]
>> * 3.8 URIBL_AB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the AB SURBL blocklist
>> * [URIs: exim.org computurn.com eiffel.com]
>>
>> A score of 6.6 because of exim.org being a listed URL? Obviously these
>> lists are faulty yet the scoring is extremely high? What prompted SA people
>> to include such drek and throw the scoring completely out the window!?
>
> is exim.org listed in those lists? I'd look at reasons of listing.
7.0 is a pretty aggressive score for rejecting at SMTP time. I think that
if you configure it to be like that, you are guaranteed to have some
spurious blocking. Try relaxing the reject-at-SMTP score (I /dev/null
mails at 22.0).
HTH,
Reid
Reply to: