Whitelisting recipient address
Moderator: Moderators
Whitelisting recipient address
Hi,
I'm a little confused, so after a little clarification.
Basically, I'm trying to whitelist one of my recipient addresses forwarded by rollernet, so no SPAM filtering is carried out on it at all at rollernet level.
I initially set the 'Whitelist' to 'Skip all' if the recipient address matches. I then realised after checking the logs, that SpamAssassin still filters.
So, I've now added an 'L3 recipient' filter for the email address and domain. I'm yet to see if this works.
However, is this the correct way to do this?
My worry now, but will check when I receive a message, is the negative score added by the SpamAssassin rule will effect the end receiving mail server score and not correctly mark it as SPAM?
Can someone offer some guidance?
Thanks in advance.
I'm a little confused, so after a little clarification.
Basically, I'm trying to whitelist one of my recipient addresses forwarded by rollernet, so no SPAM filtering is carried out on it at all at rollernet level.
I initially set the 'Whitelist' to 'Skip all' if the recipient address matches. I then realised after checking the logs, that SpamAssassin still filters.
So, I've now added an 'L3 recipient' filter for the email address and domain. I'm yet to see if this works.
However, is this the correct way to do this?
My worry now, but will check when I receive a message, is the negative score added by the SpamAssassin rule will effect the end receiving mail server score and not correctly mark it as SPAM?
Can someone offer some guidance?
Thanks in advance.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 598
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:05 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Contact:
The two whitelists can be confusing, so it helps to understand what they're both for.
The non-spamassassin whitelist is for pre-content filters. This includes DNSBL, SPF, Greylisting, and anything that takes place before the actual DATA phase. The spamassasin whitelist is for content scoring only. This means it's strictly for adding a negative score to the SA total if a whitelist match is made. Adding the address to both whitelists is the correct way to do it.
The net result of a negative score is that it will not be marked as spam by SpamAssassin. For example, on the Spam-L mailing list actual spam and bad URLs are frequently shared on the list, so it's whitelisted. Here's a real example of the resulting X-Spam-Status header:
We can see that even though the message contained some bad addresses and triggered the URIBL_BLACK, URIBL_JP_SURBL, and URIBL_OB_SURBL tests, the USER_IN_ALL_SPAM_TO test (the whitelist entry) adds -100 to the score, resulting in a total score of -92.6.
Does that answer your question?
The non-spamassassin whitelist is for pre-content filters. This includes DNSBL, SPF, Greylisting, and anything that takes place before the actual DATA phase. The spamassasin whitelist is for content scoring only. This means it's strictly for adding a negative score to the SA total if a whitelist match is made. Adding the address to both whitelists is the correct way to do it.
The net result of a negative score is that it will not be marked as spam by SpamAssassin. For example, on the Spam-L mailing list actual spam and bad URLs are frequently shared on the list, so it's whitelisted. Here's a real example of the resulting X-Spam-Status header:
Code: Select all
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-92.6 required=4.6 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
URIBL_BLACK,URIBL_JP_SURBL,URIBL_OB_SURBL,USER_IN_ALL_SPAM_TO,WEIRD_PORT
autolearn=disabled version=3.2.5
Does that answer your question?
Last edited by RollerNetSupport on Fri Oct 17, 2008 10:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Technical Support support@rollernet.us
Roller Network LLC
Roller Network LLC
Re: Whitelisting recipient address
Well, I've just received a message through and the whitelist negative score added at Rollernet level doesn't appear to have been passed through to the end mail server judging by the headers.Black20VT wrote:So, I've now added an 'L3 recipient' filter for the email address and domain. I'm yet to see if this works.
However, still interested if I've got about the process in the right way and if there's a quicker or easier way to exclude all filtering from message, both pre-content and content.
Thanks.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 598
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:05 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Contact:
We provide the "X-Spam-Status" and "X-Spam-Level" headers whenever SpamAssassin is enabled, but whether or not these are parsed further down the line is up to them.
Code: Select all
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on mail.rollernet.us
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-92.6 required=4.6 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
URIBL_BLACK,URIBL_JP_SURBL,URIBL_OB_SURBL,USER_IN_ALL_SPAM_TO,WEIRD_PORT
autolearn=disabled version=3.2.5
Technical Support support@rollernet.us
Roller Network LLC
Roller Network LLC
It seems we posted our messages at exactly the same time
Well, the same minute, I can't see the seconds
Which I guess leads me onto a 'Suggestion'. Would be nice to have a 'switch' to enable/disable all SPAM filtering, being both pre-content and content level. One button kills all and at a per domain and per individual email account level![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
Should I post this in the suggestions forum?
Thanks again.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Thanks for the explanation, was very clear. I understood how they worked, it just didn't click in my mind that the 'Skip all' didn't include SpamAssassin filtering, which had I have read it properly, I would've clearly seenRollerNetSupport wrote:Does that answer your question?
![Cool 8)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
Which I guess leads me onto a 'Suggestion'. Would be nice to have a 'switch' to enable/disable all SPAM filtering, being both pre-content and content level. One button kills all and at a per domain and per individual email account level
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
Should I post this in the suggestions forum?
Thanks again.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 598
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:05 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Contact:
Re: Whitelisting recipient address
You got it right: the recipient needs to be added to both whitelists. The quicker way would be for us to come up with a clean way to combine the two whitelists without confusing everyone.Black20VT wrote:Well, I've just received a message through and the whitelist negative score added at Rollernet level doesn't appear to have been passed through to the end mail server judging by the headers.Black20VT wrote:So, I've now added an 'L3 recipient' filter for the email address and domain. I'm yet to see if this works.
However, still interested if I've got about the process in the right way and if there's a quicker or easier way to exclude all filtering from message, both pre-content and content.
Thanks.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Technical Support support@rollernet.us
Roller Network LLC
Roller Network LLC
Here's the header from when the message was passed through the Rollernet system;RollerNetSupport wrote:We provide the "X-Spam-Status" and "X-Spam-Level" headers whenever SpamAssassin is enabled, but whether or not these are parsed further down the line is up to them.
Code: Select all
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on mail.rollernet.us X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-92.6 required=4.6 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, URIBL_BLACK,URIBL_JP_SURBL,URIBL_OB_SURBL,USER_IN_ALL_SPAM_TO,WEIRD_PORT autolearn=disabled version=3.2.5
Code: Select all
X-Remote-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on mail2.rollernet.us
X-Remote-Spam-Level:
X-Remote-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_08,
HTML_MESSAGE,RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100,RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100,RAZOR2_CHECK,
USER_IN_ALL_SPAM_TO autolearn=disabled version=3.2.5
And the scoring when received at the final destination;
Code: Select all
X-Spam-score: 0.7
X-Spam-hits: BAYES_00 -2.599, DCC_CHECK 2.5, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_08 0.001,
HTML_MESSAGE 0.001, SARE_FROM_SPAM_MONEY2 0.89, SPF_PASS -0.001
Thanks.
Re: Whitelisting recipient address
You type too fast
Thanks for your help on this. Just wanted to confirm that I ended up setting things up correctly and that there wasn't a different way to do it.
This thread may also be useful for other users, especially ones that don't read things properly like me in the first place![Cool 8)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
Thanks again.
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
Sounds like a nice featureRollerNetSupport wrote:The quicker way would be for us to come up with a clean way to combine the two whitelists without confusing everyone.
![Surprised :o](./images/smilies/icon_surprised.gif)
Thanks for your help on this. Just wanted to confirm that I ended up setting things up correctly and that there wasn't a different way to do it.
This thread may also be useful for other users, especially ones that don't read things properly like me in the first place
![Cool 8)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
Thanks again.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 598
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:05 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Contact:
Synchronizing the two whitelists is certainly something we intend to fix, but it's sufficiently complex (and not currently broken) that it's still a bit out on the to do list.
As far as at the domain level, we have that here:
https://acc.rollernet.us/mail/filter
As far as at the domain level, we have that here:
https://acc.rollernet.us/mail/filter
Technical Support support@rollernet.us
Roller Network LLC
Roller Network LLC
No problem, more of a 'nice to have'. It works, so I'm happy.RollerNetSupport wrote:Synchronizing the two whitelists is certainly something we intend to fix, but it's sufficiently complex (and not currently broken) that it's still a bit out on the to do list.
Of course, I knew that, was just testingRollerNetSupport wrote:As far as at the domain level, we have that here:
https://acc.rollernet.us/mail/filter
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
It was one of those pages I've not visited for months, so tend to forget they're even there. It's like set and forget...
Thanks again!