Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: SpamAssassin: users

False Positive on Domain Name

 

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All SpamAssassin users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 3:53 AM

Post #1 of 62 (1175 views)
Permalink
False Positive on Domain Name

My domain name, websiterepairguy.com, is causing
spamassassin to give a false positive.

Here are the tests that all give a false positive for
websiterepairguy.com:

1.5 URIBL_RHS_DOB Contains an URI of a new domain (Day Old Bread)
[URIs: websiterepairguy.com]
0.6 URIBL_PH_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the PH SURBL blocklist
[URIs: websiterepairguy.com]
4.5 URIBL_AB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the AB SURBL blocklist
[URIs: websiterepairguy.com]
1.6 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist
[URIs: websiterepairguy.com]
1.2 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist
[URIs: websiterepairguy.com]
0.6 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist
[URIs: websiterepairguy.com]

I've checked here to see if my domain is blocked:

https://admin.uribl.com/

When I lookup websiterepairguy,com, I get the
following reply:

NOT Listed on URIBL

I only seem to have this problem under the following
circumstances:

1 -- I reply to an email that someone sends me

2 -- They reply back

It's the reply back that seems to trigger the false
positive. In other words, it is the fact that
websiterepairguy.com is embedded in the body
of the message that seems to trigger the false
positive.

At will, I can trigger a false positive by sending
myself an email that consists of the following:

1 -- Any subject line will do

2 -- One thing only in the body, the domain
name websiterepairguy.com.

I think I've simplified the problem to one thing
only and that is the appearance of my domain,
websiterepairguy.com, in the body of the message.

If websiterepairguy.com appears in the body of the
message, it triggers a false positive. Any ideas?

Sorry if this question has been answered before.
I did a search and did not come up with anything.
However, I'm so puzzled by this problem that I'm
not even sure what to do a search on.

Yesterday, I installed bind9. Not sure if that is
relevant but I thought I'd mention it. Also, I'm
using kmail under Debian Squeeze as my email
client.

Of course, how I invoke spamassassin makes
a difference. If I use the following invocation, I
have no problem:

spamassassin - L

However, if I invoke it this way, I get the false
positives:

spamassassin

Obviously, if I use only local spamassassin rules,
it is not a problem.

Is this a bug? Am I doing something wrong? I'm
baffled by this problem.

I'm attaching a file that demonstrates the problem
in its simplest form. The simplest possible manifestation
of this problem is an email I send to myself that consists
of nothing but websiterepairguy.com in the body.

http://old.nabble.com/file/p33975030/spam.mbox spam.mbox

Thanks in advance to anyone who might care to reply.
My sincere apologies if this is a common problem that
I've not discovered an answer to because of the clumsiness
of my google searches.

Ed Abbott

--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33975030.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


robert at schetterer

Jun 7, 2012, 3:57 AM

Post #2 of 62 (1151 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Am 07.06.2012 12:53, schrieb Ed Abbott:
> I've checked here to see if my domain is blocked:
>
> https://admin.uribl.com/
>
> When I lookup websiterepairguy,com, I get the
> following reply:
>
> NOT Listed on URIBL

perhaps try refreshing your dns caches and/or restart spamassassin
afterwards
--
Best Regards

MfG Robert Schetterer

Germany/Munich/Bavaria


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 4:19 AM

Post #3 of 62 (1153 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Robert Schetterer wrote:
>
> perhaps try refreshing your dns caches and/or restart spamassassin
> afterwards
>

I've flushed the cache with this command:

rndc flushname websitereapirguy.com

So far, no change.

I'll restart spamassassin by rebooting my
machine next. Not sure that I'm running
a daemon for spamassassin as I'm on a
single user system.

I assume spamassassin only runs when
I check email. That's my best guess.

However, I'm going to reboot anyway.

Ed Abbott
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33975130.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 4:28 AM

Post #4 of 62 (1143 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Robert Schetterer wrote:
>
>
> perhaps try refreshing your dns caches and/or restart spamassassin
> afterwards
>
>

I've now refreshed the DNS cache and restarted spamassassin by
rebooting Linux. No change in result.

Ed Abbott

--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33975169.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


axb.lists at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 4:29 AM

Post #5 of 62 (1149 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

On 06/07/2012 01:19 PM, Ed Abbott wrote:
>
>
>
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
>>
>> perhaps try refreshing your dns caches and/or restart spamassassin
>> afterwards
>>
>
> I've flushed the cache with this command:
>
> rndc flushname websitereapirguy.com
>
> So far, no change.
>
> I'll restart spamassassin by rebooting my
> machine next. Not sure that I'm running
> a daemon for spamassassin as I'm on a
> single user system.
>
> I assume spamassassin only runs when
> I check email. That's my best guess.
>
> However, I'm going to reboot anyway.

in console check with:

host websitereapirguy.com.multi.uribl.com
anything other than
Host websitereapirguy.com.multi.uribl.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)

is bad news.

Are you forwarding your queries to a third party DNS?
If yes, this is probably the reason. That 3rd party DNS rcursor is
probably giving you positive replied to all queries.
(this is reinforced by the fact that it replies you're listed on SUBRL
as well)

Fix: remove query forwarding.

Axb


Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite

Jun 7, 2012, 4:37 AM

Post #6 of 62 (1146 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

* Axb <axb.lists [at] gmail>:

> in console check with:
>
> host websitereapirguy.com.multi.uribl.com

websiterepairguy.com.multi.uribl.com
(note the typo)

--
Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin
ralf.hildebrandt [at] charite Campus Benjamin Franklin
http://www.charite.de Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin
Geschäftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155


Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite

Jun 7, 2012, 4:38 AM

Post #7 of 62 (1145 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

> I've now refreshed the DNS cache and restarted spamassassin by
> rebooting Linux. No change in result.

Maybe YOUR server is querying an upstream DNS server which has the
data cached.

--
Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin
ralf.hildebrandt [at] charite Campus Benjamin Franklin
http://www.charite.de Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin
Geschäftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155


axb.lists at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 4:45 AM

Post #8 of 62 (1147 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

On 06/07/2012 01:37 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Axb<axb.lists [at] gmail>:
>
>> in console check with:
>>
>> host websitereapirguy.com.multi.uribl.com
>
> websiterepairguy.com.multi.uribl.com
> (note the typo)
>

Doh! - copy/paste previous author's error
(rndc flushname websitereapirguy.com)

anyway, still:

Host websiterepairguy.com.multi.uribl.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)

Host websiterepairguy.com.multi.surbl.org not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)

etc..


kdeugau at vianet

Jun 7, 2012, 8:38 AM

Post #9 of 62 (1145 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Ed Abbott wrote:
>
> My domain name, websiterepairguy.com, is causing
> spamassassin to give a false positive.
>
> Here are the tests that all give a false positive for
> websiterepairguy.com:
>
> 1.5 URIBL_RHS_DOB Contains an URI of a new domain (Day Old Bread)
> 0.6 URIBL_PH_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the PH SURBL blocklist
> 4.5 URIBL_AB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the AB SURBL blocklist
> 1.6 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist
> 1.2 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist
> 0.6 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist
>
> I've checked here to see if my domain is blocked:
>
> https://admin.uribl.com/

This only applies to the first rule; the rest are part of a different list:

http://www.surbl.org

Checking from where I'm sitting, I don't see it listed.

If you're still getting hits on these rules there's a good chance that
the DNS cache you're using is either modifying the negative results (ie,
similar to http://www.surbl.org/faqs#opendns) or has been making too
many requests to SURBL, and is now either receiving "yes it's listed"
for any request, or is generating that response for some reason.

As a local workaround (since your domain doesn't seem to be listed
currently), I suggest adding "uridnsbl_skip_domain websiterepairguy.com"
to your SpamAssassin config - that will skip doing URI blacklist lookups
altogether on your domain.

-kgd


jhardin at impsec

Jun 7, 2012, 9:11 AM

Post #10 of 62 (1144 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

On Thu, 7 Jun 2012, Kris Deugau wrote:

> Ed Abbott wrote:
>
>> My domain name, websiterepairguy.com, is causing
>> spamassassin to give a false positive.
>
> Checking from where I'm sitting, I don't see it listed.
>
> If you're still getting hits on these rules there's a good chance that
> the DNS cache you're using is either modifying the negative results (ie,
> similar to http://www.surbl.org/faqs#opendns) or has been making too
> many requests to SURBL, and is now either receiving "yes it's listed"
> for any request, or is generating that response for some reason.
>
> As a local workaround (since your domain doesn't seem to be listed
> currently), I suggest adding "uridnsbl_skip_domain websiterepairguy.com"
> to your SpamAssassin config - that will skip doing URI blacklist lookups
> altogether on your domain.

If Ed's experiencing DNS problems such that his domain is getting FPs,
then likely _all other domains_ are also getting FPs at his site, and that
workaround is only a minimal bandaid for a large problem.

It's considered best practice to set up a local, caching, non-forwarding
DNS server for use with SA and (in general) any MTA doing DNS-based
blocklist lookups. As has been stated, many BL providers set volume limits
on free access to their data, and if you're forwarding to a public DNS
server (e.g. Google DNS) then you're likely relying on a DNS server that
is, in aggregate with all its other users, exceeding those limits and thus
providing inaccurate results.

Set up a local, caching, non-forwarding DNS server on your MTA/SA host and
configure your MTA and SA to use it. This need not necessarily affect the
DNS resolution for other hosts on your local network, which could still
forward DNS requests to your chosen upstream DNS provider.

Ed, you said you've already installed BIND, that covers the "local,
caching" part. Now configure it to not forward requests.

It would also be useful if (before changing your config) you provided the
results of DNSBL lookups at your site for some large known-clean domains
like google.com, microsoft.com, etc. If they are all FPing, then the
problem is as I stated above and the fix is straightforward. If not, then
more investigation is warranted.

--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin [at] impsec FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin [at] impsec
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
...for a nation to tax itself into prosperity is like a man
standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
-- Winston Churchill
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
7 days since the first successful private support mission to ISS (SpaceX)


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 10:13 AM

Post #11 of 62 (1147 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Axb wrote:
>
> Are you forwarding your queries to a third party DNS?
>
> Axb
>

Not intentionally. Am I doing so out of ignorance?
Maybe.

I'm a lone individual working from a home computer
and Time-Warner cable is my ISP. Do DNS queries
normally go to Time-Warner first? I don't know.

I assume that whenever I do an Internet search in
a web browser that I'm using Time-Warner's DNS
servers. Therefore it would make sense to me that
I'm using Time-Warner for other DNS queries too.

Thank you for pointing out the forwarding issue. I'll try
to figure out a way to look into this.


--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33976986.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 10:18 AM

Post #12 of 62 (1141 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>
>> host websitereapirguy.com.multi.uribl.com
>
> websiterepairguy.com.multi.uribl.com
> (note the typo)
>
>

Thank you for correcting my typo! The
corrected domain is, as you state,
websiterepairguy.com

I should have copied and pasted rather
than re-typed. That's my lesson.

--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33977016.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 10:31 AM

Post #13 of 62 (1147 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Kris Deugau wrote:
>
> or has been making too
> many requests to SURBL, and is now either receiving "yes it's listed"
> for any request, or is generating that response for some reason.
>

That's entirely possible. It's only through doing research that
I learned that I'm supposed to set up bind9, or something similar.

Many months ago, I was making raw requests to SURBL because
I did not know about the following option:

spamassassin -L

Rather than deal with the problem at that time, I switched to the
-L option. Prior to switching, I'd been using spamassassin without
the -L switch out of ignorance.

More specifically, I'd been doing this:

cat spam.mbox | spamassassin -dt >temp

When I learned a better way, I did this:

cat spam.mbox | spamassassin -dtL >temp

Fortunately, my Linux distro, Debian (or KDE
or whatever) had set the default for incoming
mail to this:

spamassassin -L

However, when I tested new spamassassin rules
that I'd written, I did this initially:

cat spam.mbox | spamassassin -dt >temp

That absence of the -L switch when testing new spamassassin
rules that I personally wrote myself is what may have gotten
me into trouble.

Thanks for your reply! Much appreciated!

Ed Abbott


--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33977081.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


jhardin at impsec

Jun 7, 2012, 10:35 AM

Post #14 of 62 (1143 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

On Thu, 7 Jun 2012, Ed Abbott wrote:

>
>
> Axb wrote:
>>
>> Are you forwarding your queries to a third party DNS?
>>
>> Axb
>>
>
> Not intentionally. Am I doing so out of ignorance?
> Maybe.
>
> I'm a lone individual working from a home computer
> and Time-Warner cable is my ISP. Do DNS queries
> normally go to Time-Warner first? I don't know.
>
> I assume that whenever I do an Internet search in
> a web browser that I'm using Time-Warner's DNS
> servers. Therefore it would make sense to me that
> I'm using Time-Warner for other DNS queries too.
>
> Thank you for pointing out the forwarding issue. I'll try
> to figure out a way to look into this.

/etc/resolv.conf is where you'd start. If that says localhost (which it
should to use a local nameserver), then look at the configuration of your
local DNS server (likely BIND, likely /etc/bind/named.conf or
/etc/named/named.conf).

--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin [at] impsec FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin [at] impsec
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maxim VI: If violence wasn¢t your last resort, you failed to resort
to enough of it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
7 days since the first successful private support mission to ISS (SpaceX)


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 10:46 AM

Post #15 of 62 (1140 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Kris Deugau wrote:
>
>
> If you're still getting hits on these rules there's a good chance that
> the DNS cache you're using is either modifying the negative results (ie,
> similar to http://www.surbl.org/faqs#opendns) or has been making too
> many requests to SURBL, and is now either receiving "yes it's listed"
> for any request, or is generating that response for some reason.
>
> As a local workaround (since your domain doesn't seem to be listed
> currently), I suggest adding "uridnsbl_skip_domain websiterepairguy.com"
> to your SpamAssassin config - that will skip doing URI blacklist lookups
> altogether on your domain.
>
> -kgd
>
>

Thank you Kris for your detailed response!

I'm thinking this through and I think I'll do the
following:

1 -- Implement "uridnsbl_skip_domain websiterepairguy.com"
immediately in ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs

2 -- Research DNS caching

I don't know enough about DNS caching to make any changes.
For me, bind9 is magic. At present, I have no idea how to ask
bind9 to do things differently.

I'll take your word for it that the DNS queries may be getting
modified somewhere along the way. I just don't know enough
about DNS yet to come up with a way to research this.

Ed Abbott
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33977175.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 11:04 AM

Post #16 of 62 (1151 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

John Hardin wrote:
>
>
> It would also be useful if (before changing your config) you provided the
> results of DNSBL lookups at your site for some large known-clean domains
> like google.com, microsoft.com, etc. If they are all FPing, then the
> problem is as I stated above and the fix is straightforward. If not, then
> more investigation is warranted.
>
>

Thank you John!

Not sure if I'm fulfilling your request or not, but here is my best attempt
so far:

$ host google.com.multi.uribl.com
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
$ host google.com.multi.surbl.org
Host google.com.multi.surbl.org not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)

$ host microsoft.com.multi.surbl.org
Host microsoft.com.multi.surbl.org not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
$ host microsoft.com.multi.surbl.org
Host microsoft.com.multi.surbl.org not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)

$ host websiterepairguy.com.multi.uribl.com
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
$ host websiterepairguy.com.multi.surbl.org
websiterepairguy.com.multi.surbl.org has address 184.106.15.239
websiterepairguy.com.multi.surbl.org has address 69.16.143.110
Host websiterepairguy.com.multi.surbl.org not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)

It looks like google.com and websiterepairguy.com have something in
common. It looks like uribl.org is ignoring requests for both of these
domains and letting them time out. Is this a correct assumption?

Ed Abbott
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33977290.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


kdeugau at vianet

Jun 7, 2012, 11:57 AM

Post #17 of 62 (1167 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Ed Abbott wrote:
> $ host websiterepairguy.com.multi.surbl.org
> websiterepairguy.com.multi.surbl.org has address 184.106.15.239
> websiterepairguy.com.multi.surbl.org has address 69.16.143.110
> Host websiterepairguy.com.multi.surbl.org not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)

The first two responses here indicate something *very* wrong with the
results you're getting on DNS lookups.

URI and IP blacklists, by convention, return an IP in 127.0.0.0/8 - ie,
an IP between 127.0.0.0 and 127.255.255.255. Exactly what is returned
depends on the list and how they combine multiple logical lists into a
single set of DNS data.

John Hardin's advice about checking your resolv.conf and BIND
configuration to make sure it's really doing its own work instead of
just passing the requests to your ISP's DNS cache servers is the next
thing to check.

A caching-only BIND configuration should be pretty bare (apart from
commented-out directives - lines with a leading '//' or ';' ) but in
particular for this problem, there should be no "forwarders" sections.

If that seems clean, it's possible that your ISP has gone to the effort
of silently redirecting all DNS requests to their own servers. (I can't
think of any good reasons to do this, but some major ISPs seem to get
bizarre directives from upper management on a regular basis.)

Checking the IPs returned above in a browser redirects to a Road Runner
page that indicates they're definitely meddling with DNS responses at
some level. :( You noted in another message you're on Time-Warner
cable; I'm not familiar with the reseller agreements US ISPs might have
but at some level you're getting responses from a Road Runner system. I
don't know if there's a way you can "opt out" of this.

-kgd


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 1:04 PM

Post #18 of 62 (1145 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Kris Deugau wrote:
>
>
> Checking the IPs returned above in a browser redirects to a Road Runner
> page that indicates they're definitely meddling with DNS responses at
> some level. :( You noted in another message you're on Time-Warner
> cable; I'm not familiar with the reseller agreements US ISPs might have
> but at some level you're getting responses from a Road Runner system. I
> don't know if there's a way you can "opt out" of this.
>
> -kgd
>
>

Thank you Kris!

You are helping clear up a lot of confusion. It seems
that Time-Warner regularly hijacks DNS. Here's a blog
post that details the experience of one user:

http://blog.jonudell.net/2010/09/13/hijack-my-dns-and-i-will-be-annoyed-blame-me-and-i-will-go-ballistic/

Same thing as a tiny URL:

http://tinyurl.com/37cltzk

I assume, but do not know for sure, that this is a common
experience. This would also affect my use of spamassassin
for non-local rules, right?

Ed Abbott
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33977956.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


kdeugau at vianet

Jun 7, 2012, 1:57 PM

Post #19 of 62 (1144 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Ed Abbott wrote:
> You are helping clear up a lot of confusion. It seems
> that Time-Warner regularly hijacks DNS. Here's a blog
> post that details the experience of one user:
>
> http://blog.jonudell.net/2010/09/13/hijack-my-dns-and-i-will-be-annoyed-blame-me-and-i-will-go-ballistic/

> I assume, but do not know for sure, that this is a common
> experience. This would also affect my use of spamassassin
> for non-local rules, right?

Any rule that relies on DNS lookups, yes. :(

A few remote rules rely on other remote lookups (eg, Vipul's Razor, DCC,
pyzor) but the stock DNS-based rules alone can catch somewhere up to
about 85-90% of the spam all by themselves, in my experience. And the
non-DNS rules still rely on DNS lookups to be able to connect to the
right remote system.

Based on that blog link you *should* be able to opt-out of this
nuisance, and if it keeps coming back, take the path one respondent
noted about a cron job to request the opt-out on a regular basis (I
think every 5 minutes is probably overkill, but...)

If that fails, and if it's at all an option... take your Internet
access business elsewhere.

-kgd


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 5:50 PM

Post #20 of 62 (1146 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Kris Deugau wrote:
>
>
> A few remote rules rely on other remote lookups (eg, Vipul's Razor, DCC,
> pyzor) but the stock DNS-based rules alone can catch somewhere up to
> about 85-90% of the spam all by themselves, in my experience. And the
> non-DNS rules still rely on DNS lookups to be able to connect to the
> right remote system.
>
> -kgd
>
>

Thank you for your comment on the effectiveness of DNS-based rules.
85-90% is a lot of spam to catch!

I've been relying on local rules only, many of which I've written myself.
Local rules work well if there is something specific I can target, such
as an 800 number.

Non-local rules should work particularly well for me as I only check my
email 1-3 times a day. Therefore, an offending IP address will likely
have been reported by the time I check email. That's what I'm thinking.

Of course, you never get 100 percent. However, catching most spam
is very very helpful.

Ed Abbiott
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33979059.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


me at junc

Jun 8, 2012, 4:50 AM

Post #21 of 62 (1135 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Den 2012-06-07 19:35, John Hardin skrev:
> /etc/resolv.conf is where you'd start. If that says localhost (which
> it should to use a local nameserver), then look at the configuration
> of your local DNS server (likely BIND, likely /etc/bind/named.conf or
> /etc/named/named.conf).

#/etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 127.0.0.1
search ipv4.google.com
# options .....

maybe some knows more ?

in bind.conf dont use forwards in options section, its ok with forwards
pr zone, eg for zones that blocks you or dont want to fix there
ignorance on how:

dig +trace example.org

works, but using forwards dnssec will break, but there is nameservers
that support dnssec with forwards, but the whole chain must support it
so


me at junc

Jun 8, 2012, 5:01 AM

Post #22 of 62 (1139 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Den 2012-06-07 20:04, Ed Abbott skrev:
> It looks like uribl.org is ignoring requests for both of these
> domains and letting them time out. Is this a correct assumption?

are you using isp dns servers ?

show /etc/resolv.conf if unsure

uribl and dnsbl have startede to block dns querries from abbusive dns
forwarders such as google public dns servers, it worked if was less then
10 users abused google :)

best dont use dns servers that is NOT in your own lan


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 8, 2012, 9:17 AM

Post #23 of 62 (1136 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Kris Deugau wrote:
>
>
> Based on that blog link you *should* be able to opt-out of this
> nuisance, and if it keeps coming back, take the path one respondent
> noted about a cron job to request the opt-out on a regular basis (I
> think every 5 minutes is probably overkill, but...)
>
>

Thanks Kris.

I've contacted Time-Warner via online chat. Technical support responded
to my request to turn off DNS forwarding by saying "We don't offer DNS
forwarding." In other words, they had no idea what I was talking about.

The also said they do not support spamassassin. That's understandable.
However, I wasn't asking them to support spamassassin. I just wanted
DNS to work properly.

My general sense is that Time-Warner cable is not going to turn off DNS
forwarding, otherwise known as DNS hijacking. I used both terms in my
communication with them.

Any foreseeable problem with using Google Public DNS instead?

Thanks for all your responses so far. I live in a rural area in Maine,
USA. I'm in a town of about 20,000 people. Looks like I'm going to
have to keep my ISP.

Ed Abbott
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33982567.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


KMcGrail at PCCC

Jun 8, 2012, 9:22 AM

Post #24 of 62 (1138 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

On 6/8/2012 12:17 PM, Ed Abbott wrote:
> Any foreseeable problem with using Google Public DNS instead?

Yes. Google Public DNS can get blocked from RBLs because they end up
with too many queries. Your best bet with SA is to use your own local
caching nameserver.

Regards,
KAM


websiterepairguy at gmail

Jun 8, 2012, 9:23 AM

Post #25 of 62 (1137 views)
Permalink
Re: False Positive on Domain Name [In reply to]

Benny Pedersen wrote:
>
>
> are you using isp dns servers ?
>
> show /etc/resolv.conf if unsure
>
>

Hi Benny,

Thanks for replying!

I'm sure I'm using the DNS servers for
my ISP as I've never done anything to
alter the servers I'm using. Here's my
/etc/resolv.conf:


# Generated by NetworkManager
domain maine.rr.com
search maine.rr.com
nameserver 209.18.47.61
nameserver 209.18.47.62

rr stands for Road Runner and Road
Runner is my ISP, also known as
Time-Warner Cable.

Ed Abbott
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33982622.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All SpamAssassin users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.