Whitelist Removal

My company email is being blocked by Verizon. I've submitted numerous whitelist removal requests but nothing has changed.

Hi aspecialgift,
Your issue has been escalated to a Verizon agent. Before the agent can begin assisting you, they will need to collect further information from you. Please go to your profile page for the forum and look at the top of the middle column where you will find an area titled "My Support Cases". You can reach your profile page by clicking on your name beside your post, or at the top left of this page underneath the title of the board.
Under "My Support Cases" you will find a link to the private board where you and the agent may exchange information. This should be checked on a frequent basis, as the agent may be waiting for information from you before they can proceed with any actions. To ensure you know when they have responded to you, at the top of your support case there is a drop down menu for support case options. Open that and choose "subscribe". Please keep all correspondence regarding your issue in the private support portal.

Similar Messages

ThinkPad X201 vs new model X series??

Hi,
could you please give me your opinion.
if you buy new thinkpad, would you go for X201 or new model X series? almost same price.
as i am classic ThinkPad fanatic i love x201 but price is high considering it is old model.
what would be your idea?
thanks
+ ThinkPad X201 3626-FBG / Intel Core i5 M520 2.4Ghz / DDR3 8Gb / Intel SSD 730 Series 240Gb / 12.1" WXGA 1280x800px / Dual boot Win7 Pro x64 - Ubuntu 14.04 LTS 64bit + X200 Ultrabase + ThinkVision L2250p

Depends what you're looking for in a laptop.
Screen:
X201 has a 16:10 screen. X220 and later have 16:9 screens.
X201 can retrofit a ddecent AFFS screen. X220 and later have an okay IPS screen from factory.
Performance:
X201 through X230 have decently clocked full power CPUs. X240 has a bit weaker but still okay CPU. Everything afterwards is low-power.
X201 to X220 also significantly increased integrated GPU performance. X220 to X230 to X240 are modest increases.
Storage:
X201 can only take a primary drive. X220 and later can take a primary plus mSATA/NGFF SSD.
Wifi Card:
X201 and X220 can have the BIOS whitelist removed for wifi cards. X230 and later cannot.
Battery Life:
X201 to X220 is the biggest jump in battery life. X220 to X230 to X240 are relatively minor increases. X220 and later can take a battery slice too.
Keyboard:
X201 and X220 have classic keyboards. X230 and later have chiclet keyboards.
W520: i7-2720QM, Q2000M at 1080/688/1376, 21GB RAM, 500GB + 750GB HDD, FHD screen
X61T: L7500, 3GB RAM, 500GB HDD, XGA screen, Ultrabase
Y3P: 5Y70, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD, QHD+ screen

Intel Centrino 6200N on X60s?

Hi all,
I bought this card on ebay (Lenovo branded) hoping it would work with my X100e. Both are arriving soon. I see now that the BIOS will not allow the X100e to boot with the 6200 in place. How about on my X60s? It currently has an Intel 3945abg card and for that reason, I keep my home wifi "802.11n with g-compatible."
Any ideas? Or should I just return the card when it arrives?

Unlike the x100, for the x60 there's already a bios with the whitelist removed.
http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=55837
So, even if the stock bios doesn't accept that card you can easily fix the problem.

Y510p Bios mod, Best unlocked bios settings.

Im starting this thread so that for all who have unlocked their bios for wirelesscard whitelist removal or what ever, using the link on techInferno using svl7 mod can have a guide as to what settings can be used to improve the performance of their y510p and what settings to stay away from. For those who have difficulties in retrieving the files from techInfernos website can pm me. Any and all suggestions and requests are welcome. Happy modding.

Hi shfearon
Thanks for the BIOS files.
I also posted on TI but as you know, no one is reviewing my posts (genuine). Could you please download and provide the VBIOS file as well please, they are in the following thread in second post.
http://forum.techinferno.com/lenovo-ibm/4668-lenovo-y410p-y510p-unlocked-bios-wlan-whitelist-mod-vbios-mod.html
I think these are the files -
http://forum.techinferno.com/attachments/lenovo-ibm/12111d1406408972-ultra-bay-vbios-%5Bv3.05%5D_modified.zip
Also, I have another question -
Can I just flash the VBIOS? I dont need the BIOS unlocked, just the options that VBIOS can provide to play around with the voltages and settings of the Ultrabay GPU.
Thanks again and here is a Kudo for your efforts.

X61 wireless problem

Hi, I bought a "new" x61 and I have some problems with the wireless pci card. In the first PCI slot isn't even seen from the system (both linux and windows xp), I tried to change it to the second PCI slot and finally the system finds and install it but windows keep giving me "This device cannot turn on (Code 10)" and Linux "The device is hard switched off". The front switch is turned on and the wireless card is enabled in the BIOS, I even tried using the wireless card from another x61 which i know it works but nothing change. Wireless card is the original Intel 4965ag and I tried both with the last official bios 2.22 and with the one from this forum with sata2 and whitelist removed.
I'm starting to think that the problem is in the mainboard.

Hi tatarimoke and welcome to the community,
If you have Hotkeys installed, what is shown if you press Fn + F5? Are you able to turn it on from there?
Installing the card in the second slot makes it the same as a WWAN card. You would need to install Access Connections in order to turn it on from there.
Dave
T430u, x301, x200T, x61T, x61, x32, x41T, x40, U160, ThinkPad Tablet 1838-22R, Z500 touch, Yoga Tab 2 Windows 8.1, Yoga Tablet 3 Pro
Did someone help you today? Press the star on the left to thank them with a Kudo!
If you find a post helpful and it answers your question, please mark it as an "Accepted Solution"!
If someone helped you today, pay it forward. Help Someone Else!
English Community Deutsche Community Comunidad en Español Русскоязычное Сообщество

Does (or Will) T410s support mSATA?

Just got a Intel 310 SSD from newegg and tried it on my T410s. It uses mSATA port which is the same as mini-PCIe and fits in the place for the wireless WAN card. However, my T410s doesn't recognize it., so I guess the computer does not support mSATA for now.
It looks like the new T420 series will get mSATA support. I hope Lenovo engineers will add mSATA support to T410 series (say, by updating the BIOS). The 1.8inch HDD is really a big limitaion for T410s and I need the mSATA port for another hard drive.
Solved!
Go to Solution.

No. Actually, though it does physically fit, mSATA != mPCI-E.
You're going to have to send it back and wait for the SuperTalent CoreStore MV and a hacked BIOS with whitelist removed to use it.
That SSD is native mPCI-E and not mSATA so it will work in the T410s, and you need a hacked BIOS to use it because ThinkPads don't like hardware that doesn't come with them, a really dumb limitation that most business laptops have. Also, that SSD blows the Intel 310 out of the water in terms of speed.
Or better yet, go buy an 80 GB 1.8" SandForce SSD with the $190 that you'll get back. Or go get the UltraBay hard drive adapter III so that you can use another hard drive in place of the DVD drive (I can't remember if it will fit in the T410s though, could someone else check?).

G550 Bios white list.

Hi lenovo is there any chance you could update your whitelist so that the Broadcom Wireless N Wifi cards can be used. I am havin compatiblity issues with Linux and the Router due to port Linux drivers for the Intel 5100 AGN.
My old trusty BBCM94321MC Broadcom Wifi didn't have this issue.
Thanks in advance. i can't give Dev ID as old laptop no longer works but can remember the Subvender which was 0x106b as it bought it of a mate whom had a apple mac that died.

Take it i'll not be getting a response to this thread?, All i am after is either a list of compatible Wifi's that are Broadcom based or the next bios to have the Bios whitelist removed?
I was thinking of staying with Lenovo products but if this is the level of help then well you've just lost another customer.

Wireless card (RTL8188CE) on Thinkpad L530? [seems solved]

I recently bought a Thinkpad and now am in the process of configuring Arch on it.. But the wireless card doesn't work as it should...
lspci says that the card is:
06:00.0 Network controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8188CE 802.11b/g/n WiFi Adapter (rev 01)
The driver used is rtl8192ce, which should be fine as far as I know... and I'm on Kernel 3.4.4-2..
Now the thing is, it works, but very unstable... wpa_supplicant connects without problems, it works the same way with dhcpd or static, which is :
At one moment, it works perfectly fine, downloads packages I want to install, etc,
one minute later it can not find any host (Unknown error).
When I ping something - sometimes it works instantly with normal time (about 50ms), sometimes not at all, sometimes with time of over 1000ms(!!!) and about 40% packet loss.
What is interesting is that it seems like pinging the router itself works without problems all the time (but with initial lag). But the router can't be the problem, the card itself is fine too... So I suppose the driver is broken somehow? (The wifi on the same laptop works fine with Windows and the same network)
I don't know what to do...
Thanks in advance!
Update:
I started using networkmanager and strangely the problems vanished I hope it'll stay that way...
Last edited by icetonic (2012-08-05 19:56:22)

Yeah, I had the bios whitelist removed for my E430. I searched the thread, and you seem to be right that flashing the bios seems to be somewhat difficult. Though I think that the references there then to be for the x230 tablet. I didn't search all that hard, but the few posts I viewed were all the tablet.
I think what bricked my laptop was the UEFI bug. I got a kernel panic, and the dump was all funky looking. Normally you can somewhat decipher what caused the panic and whatnot, nothing of the sort here, I could barely tell it was a kernel panic. After that I couldn't boot. I couldn't even get a POST, which is what made me suspicious of the UEFI thing. Apparently what is happening when those Samsungs were bricked was that the NVRAM was being written to with garbage. So I thought that maybe that is where the missing info from the kernel panic went. Again, this is pure speculation, as I have no way of confirming, but I contacted Matthew Garrett and he said that my report was similar to a few other ThinkPad brickings that had also been reported to him.
The way my problem was "solved" was warranty repair. Essentially my warranty was voided when I flashed the modified bios, but if the bios is unreachable, they have no way of telling that (and I also think that my issue was totally unrelated to having a modified bios anyway), so they replaced my motherboard.
So now I have a Windows 8 bios, which is fast to POST, as this is one of the specifications for the windows 8 certification. But Serg008 from that thread I linked to told me that although he can modify the bios itself, it is again a case of being unable to flash the then modified bios to the machine. So I was stuck with the RTL8188CE until I figured out the relevant FRU for the Intel card that was an option with my machine. I found one of them on ebay just the other day and it works amazingly. Though now I have a top of the line 2x2 Intel card that I can't use (6235) and apparently has to have a very recent chipset to use. So I cannot even put it in an older machine either... I'll find a use for it eventually though.
So good luck with your issue. I'd say take a look at the FRU parts list for your machine. The list for teh E430 didn't include the Intel card for some reason, so a bit of hunting was necessary. But it might be included in your machine's list. When you find it, you can at least go to this page to see how much IBM or Lenovo will charge you for it.

Auto-whitelist

Greetings,
not sure how many people still run 10.4 mail systems. but what the heck
I have a mail server that has been running spammassassin for years. pumping SA learn and running spamtrainer.
recently i received OS and postfix error messages regarding insufficient storage space although i had 30gig of room on the drive.
During a clone operation i discovered a very large Auto-whitelist file in /var/clamav/.spamassassin
i don't remember setting Auto-Whitelist 1
mylocal.cf doesn't mention AutoWhitelist
and my amavisd.conf has it commented out .
#$saautowhitelist = 0; # turn on AWL (default: false)
# Bayesian Auto Learn
auto_learn 1
# Safe Reporting
safe_reporting 0
# Full/Terse Reporting
usetersereport 0
# Subject Tag
subject_tag * Warning: Junk Mail *
# Rewrite the Subject
rewrite_subject 0
# Use Bayesian Filtering
use_bayes 1
# OK locals
ok_locales en
# OK languages
ok_languages en fr de ja
# Required hits to be marked as spam
required_hits 5
I ran a test message through SA, i did not see anything referencing Auto-Whitelist.
here is debug ::: ::
}mx1:/var/clamav root# spamassassin -D < /private/var/root/Documents/Message1.rtf
debug: SpamAssassin version 3.0.1
debug: Score set 0 chosen.
debug: running in taint mode? yes
debug: Running in taint mode, removing unsafe env vars, and resetting PATH
debug: PATH included '/bin', keeping.
debug: PATH included '/sbin', keeping.
debug: PATH included '/usr/bin', keeping.
debug: PATH included '/usr/sbin', keeping.
debug: Final PATH set to: /bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin
debug: using "/etc/mail/spamassassin/init.pre" for site rules init.pre
debug: config: read file /etc/mail/spamassassin/init.pre
debug: using "//usr/share/spamassassin" for default rules dir
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/10_misc.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20antiratware.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20bodytests.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20_compensate.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20dnsbltests.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20_drugs.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20fake_helotests.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20headtests.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20htmltests.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20metatests.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20_phrases.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20_****.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20_ratware.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/20uritests.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/23_bayes.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/25body_testses.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/25body_testspl.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/25_hashcash.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/25head_testses.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/25head_testspl.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/25_spf.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/25_uribl.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/30textde.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/30textes.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/30textfr.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/30textit.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/30textnl.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/30textpl.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/30textsk.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/50_scores.cf
debug: config: read file //usr/share/spamassassin/60_whitelist.cf
debug: using "//etc/mail/spamassassin" for site rules dir
debug: config: read file //etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
debug: using "/private/var/root/.spamassassin" for user state dir
debug: using "/private/var/root/.spamassassin/user_prefs" for user prefs file
debug: config: read file /private/var/root/.spamassassin/user_prefs
debug: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL from @INC
debug: plugin: registered Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840)
debug: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Hashcash from @INC
debug: plugin: registered Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Hashcash=HASH(0x1a8be70)
debug: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF from @INC
debug: plugin: registered Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF=HASH(0x1af36a4)
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) implements 'parse_config'
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Hashcash=HASH(0x1a8be70) implements 'parse_config'
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) inhibited further callbacks
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: auto_learn 1
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: safe_reporting 0
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: usetersereport 0
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: subject_tag * Warning: Junk Mail *
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: rewrite_subject 0
debug: using "/private/var/root/.spamassassin" for user state dir
debug: bayes: 17114 tie-ing to DB file R/O /private/var/root/.spamassassin/bayes_toks
debug: bayes: 17114 tie-ing to DB file R/O /private/var/root/.spamassassin/bayes_seen
debug: bayes: found bayes db version 3
debug: using "/private/var/root/.spamassassin" for user state dir
debug: bayes: Not available for scanning, only 0 spam(s) in Bayes DB < 200
debug: bayes: 17114 untie-ing
debug: bayes: 17114 untie-ing db_toks
debug: bayes: 17114 untie-ing db_seen
debug: Score set 1 chosen.
debug: bayes: 17114 tie-ing to DB file R/O /private/var/root/.spamassassin/bayes_toks
debug: bayes: 17114 tie-ing to DB file R/O /private/var/root/.spamassassin/bayes_seen
debug: bayes: found bayes db version 3
debug: bayes: Not available for scanning, only 0 spam(s) in Bayes DB < 200
debug: bayes: 17114 untie-ing
debug: bayes: 17114 untie-ing db_toks
debug: bayes: 17114 untie-ing db_seen
debug: metadata: X-Spam-Relays-Trusted:
debug: metadata: X-Spam-Relays-Untrusted:
debug: ---- MIME PARSER START ----
debug: main message type: text/plain
debug: parsing normal part
debug: added part, type: text/plain
debug: ---- MIME PARSER END ----
debug: decoding: no encoding detected
debug: Loading languages file...
debug: Can't determine language uniquely enough
debug: metadata: X-Languages:
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) implements 'parsed_metadata'
debug: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
debug: Net::DNS version: 0.66
debug: trying (3) sun.com...
debug: looking up NS for 'sun.com'
debug: NS lookup of sun.com succeeded => Dns available (set dns_available to hardcode)
debug: is DNS available? 1
debug: uri found: mailto:[email protected]
debug: uri found: mailto:[email protected]
debug: uri found: mailto:[email protected]
debug: uri found: mailto:[email protected]
debug: uri found: mailto:[email protected]
debug: URIDNSBL: domains to query: beth.k12.pa.us hetnet.nl aim.com
debug: all '*From' addrs:
debug: Running tests for priority: 0
debug: running header regexp tests; score so far=0
debug: registering glue method for checkhashcash_doublespend (Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Hashcash=HASH(0x1a8be70))
debug: registering glue method for checkfor_spf_helopass (Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF=HASH(0x1af36a4))
debug: SPF: message was delivered entirely via trusted relays, not required
debug: registering glue method for checkhashcashvalue (Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Hashcash=HASH(0x1a8be70))
debug: all '*To' addrs:
debug: registering glue method for checkfor_spfsoftfail (Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF=HASH(0x1af36a4))
debug: SPF: message was delivered entirely via trusted relays, not required
debug: registering glue method for checkfor_spfpass (Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF=HASH(0x1af36a4))
debug: registering glue method for checkfor_spf_helosoftfail (Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF=HASH(0x1af36a4))
debug: registering glue method for checkfor_spf_helofail (Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF=HASH(0x1af36a4))
debug: running body-text per-line regexp tests; score so far=-2.801
debug: running uri tests; score so far=-2.801
debug: registering glue method for check_uridnsbl (Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840))
debug: Razor2 is not available
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) implements 'check_tick'
debug: URIDNSBL: query for hetnet.nl took 1 seconds to look up (multi.surbl.org.:hetnet.nl)
debug: URIDNSBL: query for aim.com took 1 seconds to look up (multi.surbl.org.:aim.com)
debug: URIDNSBL: query for beth.k12.pa.us took 1 seconds to look up (multi.surbl.org.:beth.k12.pa.us)
debug: URIDNSBL: queries completed: 6 started: 8
debug: URIDNSBL: queries active: at Mon Mar 8 18:06:35 2010
debug: running raw-body-text per-line regexp tests; score so far=-2.801
debug: running full-text regexp tests; score so far=-2.801
debug: Razor2 is not available
debug: Current PATH is: /bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin
debug: Pyzor is not available: pyzor not found
debug: DCCifd is not available: no r/w dccifd socket found.
debug: DCC is not available: no executable dccproc found.
debug: Running tests for priority: 500
debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x1924840) implements 'checkpostdnsbl'
debug: URIDNSBL: queries completed: 8 started: 8
debug: URIDNSBL: queries active: at Mon Mar 8 18:06:35 2010
debug: waiting 2 seconds for URIDNSBL lookups to complete
debug: URIDNSBL: queries completed: 0 started: 0
debug: URIDNSBL: queries active: DNSBL=8 at Mon Mar 8 18:06:35 2010
debug: URIDNSBL: query for aim.com took 2 seconds to look up (sbl.spamhaus.org.:132.51.12.64)
debug: URIDNSBL: query for beth.k12.pa.us took 2 seconds to look up (sbl.spamhaus.org.:2.96.96.209)
debug: URIDNSBL: query for aim.com took 2 seconds to look up (sbl.spamhaus.org.:80.73.200.207)
debug: URIDNSBL: query for aim.com took 2 seconds to look up (sbl.spamhaus.org.:107.1.236.64)
debug: URIDNSBL: query for hetnet.nl took 2 seconds to look up (sbl.spamhaus.org.:34.63.75.213)
debug: URIDNSBL: query for hetnet.nl took 2 seconds to look up (sbl.spamhaus.org.:69.63.75.213)
debug: URIDNSBL: query for aim.com took 2 seconds to look up (sbl.spamhaus.org.:232.157.188.205)
debug: URIDNSBL: query for beth.k12.pa.us took 2 seconds to look up (sbl.spamhaus.org.:20.3.172.207)
debug: URIDNSBL: queries completed: 8 started: 0
debug: URIDNSBL: queries active: at Mon Mar 8 18:06:36 2010
debug: done waiting for URIDNSBL lookups to complete
debug: running meta tests; score so far=-2.801
debug: running header regexp tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: running body-text per-line regexp tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: running uri tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: running raw-body-text per-line regexp tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: running full-text regexp tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: Running tests for priority: 1000
debug: running meta tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: running header regexp tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: running body-text per-line regexp tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: running uri tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: running raw-body-text per-line regexp tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: running full-text regexp tests; score so far=-1.231
debug: auto-learn: currently using scoreset 1.
debug: auto-learn: message score: -1.231, computed score for autolearn: -1.231
debug: auto-learn? ham=0.1, spam=12, body-points=0, head-points=-2.801, learned-points=0
debug: auto-learn? yes, ham (-1.231 < 0.1)
debug: Learning Ham
debug: all '*From' addrs:
debug: all '*To' addrs:
debug: uri found: mailto:[email protected]
debug: uri found: mailto:[email protected]
debug: uri found: mailto:[email protected]
debug: uri found: mailto:[email protected]
debug: uri found: mailto:[email protected]
debug: lock: 17114 created /private/var/root/.spamassassin/bayes.lock.mx1.beth.k12.pa.us.17114
debug: lock: 17114 trying to get lock on /private/var/root/.spamassassin/bayes with 0 retries
debug: lock: 17114 link to /private/var/root/.spamassassin/bayes.lock: link ok
debug: bayes: 17114 tie-ing to DB file R/W /private/var/root/.spamassassin/bayes_toks
debug: bayes: 17114 tie-ing to DB file R/W /private/var/root/.spamassassin/bayes_seen
debug: bayes: found bayes db version 3
debug: ebd3a443815ae7214b74ef30dfb2c5524e3adf7a@sa_generated: already learnt correctly, not learning twice
debug: bayes: 17114 untie-ing
debug: bayes: 17114 untie-ing db_toks
debug: bayes: 17114 untie-ing db_seen
debug: bayes: files locked, now unlocking lock
debug: unlock: 17114 unlink /private/var/root/.spamassassin/bayes.lock
debug: is spam? score=-1.231 required=5
debug: tests=ALLTRUSTED,MISSING_DATE,MISSINGSUBJECT
debug: subtests=_UNUSABLEMSGID
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on mx1.beth.k12.pa.us
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=ALLTRUSTED,MISSINGDATE,
MISSING_SUBJECT autolearn=unavailable version=3.0.1
\f0\fs24 \cf0 Return-Path: <[email protected]>\
Received: from murder ([unix socket]) by bragg.beth.k12.pa.us (Cyrus v2.2.12-OS X 10.4.8) with LMTPA; Sun, 07 Mar 2010 22:32:43 -0500\
Received: from smtp3.beth.k12.pa.us (smtp3.beth.k12.pa.us [10.135.1.13]) by bragg.beth.k12.pa.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D3F02CE4B19 for <[email protected]>; Sun, 7 Mar 2010 22:32:43 -0500 (EST)\
Received: from localhost (mx1.beth.k12.pa.us [10.135.1.6]) by smtp3.beth.k12.pa.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E5EB2425D0C for <[email protected]>; Sun, 7 Mar 2010 22:32:07 -0500 (EST)\
Received: from mx1.beth.k12.pa.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx1.beth.k12.pa.us [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 11329-05 for <[email protected]>; Sun, 7 Mar 2010 19:32:06 -0800 (PST)\
Received: from mail2.beth.k12.pa.us (mail2.beth.k12.pa.us [192.227.0.10]) by mx1.beth.k12.pa.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DDDFCF9E5 for <[email protected]>; Sun, 7 Mar 2010 19:32:06 -0800 (PST)\
Received: from cpsmtpb-ews07.kpnxchange.com (cpsmtpb-ews07.kpnxchange.com [213.75.39.10]) by mail2.beth.k12.pa.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E83E51479 for <[email protected]>; Sun, 7 Mar 2010 22:32:05 -0500 (EST)\
Received: from cpbrm-ews29.kpnxchange.com ([10.94.84.160]) by cpsmtpb-ews07.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 8 Mar 2010 04:32:05 +0100\
Received: from CPSMTPM-EML04.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.39.74]) by cpbrm-ews29.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 8 Mar 2010 04:32:04 +0100\
Received: from localhost ([10.94.77.199]) by CPSMTPM-EML04.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.0.6001.18000); Mon, 8 Mar 2010 04:32:04 +0100\
X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2\
Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message\
Mime-Version: 1.0\
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_00101CABE6F.E8E7FFDB"\
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5\
Message-Id: <[email protected]>\
X-Ms-Has-Attach: \
X-Ms-Tnef-Correlator: \
Thread-Topic: EU INT LOTTO\
Thread-Index: Acqbc/3PXjmnUcQsGeSny2PogEEg==\
X-Originalarrivaltime: 08 Mar 2010 03:32:04.0493 (UTC) FILETIME=[EC150BD0:01CABE6F]\
X-Recipientdomain: beth.k12.pa.us\
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.117 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=BAYES_50, HTML5060, HTML_MESSAGE, MIMEQP_LONGLINE, NOREALNAME, SUBJALLCAPS, UNDISC_RECIPS, UPPERCASE5075\
X-Spam-Level: **\
EU INT LOTTO\
YOUR EMAIL ID HAS WON \'db1,000,000.00, IN THE FIRST CATEGORY, ALL THE E-MAIL ADDRESSES WERE SELECTED THROUGH ELECTRONIC BALLOTING SYSTEM OF INTERNET E-MAIL USERS, FROM WHICH YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS CAME OUT AS THE WINNING COUPON.\
Clarification and procedure Contact: [email protected]\
Tel:\'ca\'ca\'ca\'ca +31-630-861-292\'ca\'ca\'ca\'ca\'ca\'ca\'ca\'ca \
Miss. Gillian Rowland \
Qualification winning Number [EU/ILO-564/003/008] \
Expiring date is 19th of March, 2010.\
All response should be send Via Email: [email protected]\
}mx1:/var/clamav root#

postfix receives the mail, then passes it to amavisd.
amavisd decides what scanners to use (clamav/spamassassin and possibly others) and performs the scan
amavisd might not scan the messages if certain criteria are met (size too large, white list, etc), this is all configurable in amavisd.conf. For example, the size threshold by default may be too small, so messages with large graphics may not be scanned.
after amavis processes the message, depending on the config of amavis, certain actions are performed (add headers, discard, reject, bounce, etc).
then amavisd passes the mail back to postfix
postfix delivers any deliverable mail to cyrus/dovecot and/or processes and bounce/rejection.
a rejection doesn't work in the above scenario because it's already been accepted by postfix.
best to discard.
if you would like to learn more about the flow and logic, look at the amavisd config file
/etc/amavisd.conf
and check out the docs
http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/
Jeff

Unable to whitelist our mail server IP

Hi,
I hope Verizon Support staff will see this message as it is practically our last resort.
Ever since we upgraded our dedicated server used as both web and mail server for the domain kraisoft.com (which inflicted IP address change) all emails sent out from this server to Verizon customers are being rejected with the following bounce message:
host relay.verizon.net[206.46.232.11] refused to talk to me:
571 Email from 69.64.78.50 is currently blocked by Verizon Online's anti-spam system. The email sender or Email Service Provider may visit http://www.verizon.net/whitelist and request removal of the block. 150330
Any attempts to whitelist our server using the above-mentioned form end up within several minutes with seemingy automatic (judging by its uselessness and the time taken to investigate) reply:
Your IP has been blocked because of spam issues or because your ISP indicates that it is dynamically assigned
No Reverse Hostname associated with your IP address.
Once you have addressed any security-related issues on your network, you should contact Verizon Online Security via this form.
Sincerely,
Verizon Online Security
Any attempts to reply to this message, or use "this form", or email [email protected] quoted in the message end in complete and total silence.
Needless to say the IP adress in question - 69.64.78.50 -
1. Does not have any spam issues as it is a freshly assigned IP address for a new dedicated server built a couple of weeks ago (with your rejection started from the day one). The Postfix mailer on the server is configured properly, not an open relay, isn't listed in any of the 100 common blacklists, uses SSL client connections, has SPF records, signs email using DKIM etc.
2. Isn't by any means a dynamic IP. It is a static IP, one of the 4 assigned to the server by the hoster.
3. ANY available tool (online or command-line) will show within seconds that a proper reverse hostname kraisoft.com is assosiated with the IP address in question 69.64.78.50 so the reply is obviously irrelevant.
This is getting extremely frustrating and we'd be very, very grateful if this issue could be escalated to someone who can provide some additional info or resolve the issue.
Thank you.

Your issue has been escalated to a Verizon agent. Before the agent can begin assisting you, they will need to collect further information from you.
Please go to your profile page for the forum, and look in the middle, right at the top where you will find an area titled "My Support Cases". You can reach your profile page by clicking on your name beside your post, or at the top left of this page underneath the title of the board.
Under “My Support Cases” you will find a link to the private board where you and the agent may exchange information. This should be checked on a frequent basis as the agent may be waiting for information from you before they can proceed with any actions.
To ensure you know when they have responded to you, at the top of your support case there is a drop down menu for support case options. Open that and choose "subscribe".
Please keep all correspondence regarding your issue in the private support portal.

Spamassassin, auto whitelist, backscatter and spam problems.

My Mail is handled by an XServe with Mac OS X Server 10.5.5.
I have many email problems. One of them is an email backscatter problem. Sometimes, but not always, when email is identified as spam, an email gets sent back to the "From" address saying it is spam. This email seems to come directly from my servers, which is bad as spammers usually spoof the From addresses. I have modified amavisd.conf as per below. I changed all the D_BOUNCE instances to D_REJECT, yet still emails seeming to come from my server gets sent back to the From address. This is the relevant bit out of amavisd.conf:
$finalvirusdestiny = D_REJECT;
$finalbanneddestiny = D_REJECT;
$finalspamdestiny = D_REJECT;
$finalbad_headerdestiny = D_PASS;
I tried testing this by sending lots of emails that with keywords in them that rules are set up for to add enough points so that such emails get blocked, however, these emails seem to come through. At first I thought this was the AWL's doing, but by examining the headers of the email, there is no X-SPAM header as I'd expect, which makes me believe Spamassassin has not checked the email?? What can cause emails to bypass spamassassin and how do I get spamassassin to check every email? This seems to be a cause of my other problem of a lot of SPAM passing through the spam filter.
I am also having a lot of trouble understanding the SA AWL.
Is there any way I can change the scores in the AWL database?
I have tried:
spamassassin --remove-addr-from-whitelist=[email protected]
This outputs a message saying it removed an address from the whitelist, but in reality does absolutely nothing. Way I can tell is by using this script which still shows the same entries for the relevant email address:
http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.0.x/dist/tools/check_whitelist
I'm stumped. Any answers/thoughts/suggestions would be much appreciated. Please help!

postfix receives the mail, then passes it to amavisd.
amavisd decides what scanners to use (clamav/spamassassin and possibly others) and performs the scan
amavisd might not scan the messages if certain criteria are met (size too large, white list, etc), this is all configurable in amavisd.conf. For example, the size threshold by default may be too small, so messages with large graphics may not be scanned.
after amavis processes the message, depending on the config of amavis, certain actions are performed (add headers, discard, reject, bounce, etc).
then amavisd passes the mail back to postfix
postfix delivers any deliverable mail to cyrus/dovecot and/or processes and bounce/rejection.
a rejection doesn't work in the above scenario because it's already been accepted by postfix.
best to discard.
if you would like to learn more about the flow and logic, look at the amavisd config file
/etc/amavisd.conf
and check out the docs
http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/
Jeff

Whitelist Help

Our messages to verizon.com recently starting being blocked by Verizon's online anti-spam system. I submitted a whitelist request via http://www.verizon.net/whitelist and we were rejected due to "Your IP has been blocked because of spam issues or because your ISP indicates that it is dynamically assigned" Our IP addres is not dynamically assigned and we do not send out unsolicited email. Our reverse DNS entries are correct, we use a 1024 bit DMIK, our SPF records are correct and http://mxtoolbox.com/ reports that we not not listed on any of the 87 blacklists that they check.
How do we get removed from Verizon's anti-spam system?

Hi mwfischer,
Your issue has been escalated to a Verizon agent. Before the agent can begin assisting you, they will need to collect further information from you. Please go to your profile page for the forum and look at the top of the middle column where you will find an area titled "My Support Cases". You can reach your profile page by clicking on your name beside your post, or at the top left of this page underneath the title of the board.
Under "My Support Cases" you will find a link to the private board where you and the agent may exchange information. This should be checked on a frequent basis, as the agent may be waiting for information from you before they can proceed with any actions. To ensure you know when they have responded to you, at the top of your support case there is a drop down menu for support case options. Open that and choose "subscribe". Please keep all correspondence regarding your issue in the private support portal.

Content Filter is not accepting whitelist settings

Hello,
After a spate of dodgy file attachments we configured a filter to block all zip file attachments which is working correctly. Unfortunately there are a few addresses that send frequently during the day that we have tried to whitelist to no effect. We have
configured the email address to be in "Configure Content Allow lists" section under the Antispam->Configure " and also in an allowed senders list in the filters/ filter lists.
Wehave then restarted the Transport service a number of times and also the server.
The error message we continue to get is as below:ID: {511DF584-F632-4DB9-8487-9CA3F041E782}
Detection Time: 20/01/2014 20:11
State: Removed
Incident Category: File filter
Incident Name: Blocked File types: *
File: plit.zip
Folder: SMTP Messages
Scan Job Name: Transport
Can anyone offer any ideas with this?
Many thanks for your time!

Hi,
It sounds odd, do you double check the rule?
Based on my knowledge, if you configure the IP into allow list, it would bypass the filter in FPE.
You try to upgrade to the latest version to see if the issue persists.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/forefront/ff899332.aspx
Best Regards
Quan Gu

Whitelist issue

Messages sent from our server to verizon.com are being blocked by Verizon's anti-spam system.
I have submitted a whitelistrequest requests via http://www.verizon.net/whitelist but just got automated messages
"Your IP has been blocked because of spam issues or because your ISP indicates that it is dynamically assigned"
Our IP address is not dynamically assigned and we do not send out unsolicited or bulk email. Neither do our customers.
We are not listed on any of the blacklists.
How do we get removed from Verizon's anti-spam system?

Hi mwestrik,
Your issue has been escalated to a Verizon agent. Before the agent can begin assisting you, they will need to collect further information from you. Please go to your profile page for the forum and look at the top of the middle column where you will find an area titled "My Support Cases". You can reach your profile page by clicking on your name beside your post, or at the top left of this page underneath the title of the board.
Under "My Support Cases" you will find a link to the private board where you and the agent may exchange information. This should be checked on a frequent basis, as the agent may be waiting for information from you before they can proceed with any actions. To ensure you know when they have responded to you, at the top of your support case there is a drop down menu for support case options. Open that and choose "subscribe". Please keep all correspondence regarding your issue in the private support portal.

Whitelist for dynamic destination SM59

Hi All,
In SM59 screen, i see an red alert symbol No RFC call back check (rfc/callback_security_method undefined).
Also an entry Whitelist for dynamic destination
What are these entries? Is this required?
Can these entries(Whitelist) be removed from the the screen?
rfc/callback_security_method is dynamically switcable but not able to change the value to from RZ11. Does this needs to be declared in profile parameter first? If so what value needs to be set?
Kindly let me know, I read the documentation for rfc/callback_security_method. Not sure what value to be set.
Parameter
rfc/callback_security_method
Short text
Permit or deny execution of RFC callbacks in accordance with configured whitelist and write corresponding entry in Security Audit Log.
Parameter Description
Value 0: Emergency mode (fallback).
If callbacks have been forbidden by a previous call of the function module RFC_CALLBACK_REJECTED, the callback is rejected. Otherwise, the callback is executed.
All whitelist entries for RFC callbacks (including the active entires) are ignored.
Value 1: Default mode (compatibility mode).
If callbacks have been forbidden by a previous call of the function module RFC_CALLBACK_REJECTED, the callback is rejected.
If the callback is forbidden by an active whitelist, it is rejected.
In all other cases, the callback is permitted.
Every permitted callback is logged in the Security Audit Log with a "non-critical" (green) entry. Every rejected callback is logged with a "critical" (red) entry.
Value 2: Simulation Mode.
If callbacks have been forbidden by a previous call of the function module RFC_CALLBACK_REJECTED, the callback is rejected.
If the callback is forbidden by an active whitelist, it is rejected.
In all other cases, the callback is permitted.
Every rejected callback is logged with a "critical" (red) entry in the Security Audit Log. Every permitted callback, which would have been rejected if the whitelist had been activated, is also logged with a "critical" (red) entry in the Security Audit Log. All other permitted callbacks are logged with a "non-critical" (green) entry.
Value 3: Most Secure Mode:
If callbacks have been forbidden by a previous call of the function module RFC_CALLBACK_REJECTED, the callback is rejected.
If the callback is forbidden by an active or inactive whitelist, it is rejected. (Note that, in this mode, an inactive whitelist has the same effect as an active whitelist.)
In all other cases, the callback is permitted.
Every rejected callback is logged with a "critical" (red) entry in the Security Audit Log. Every permitted callback is logged with a "non-critical" (green) entry.
Regards
Shashi

Hi,
I think you are not able to switch rfc/callback_security_method parameter due to sap user roles missing. Can you attach the error you get once you try to edit this parameter?
In case you wanto to switch the parameter rfc/callback_security_method to 2 please notice that you have to create the audit log from SM19 transaction before.
Moreover take into account that it still not possible to set rfc/callback_security_method=3 due to a bug with the transportation tool. See note 1992755 http://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1992755
Regards.
Antonio

Whitelist Removal

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for