Rejected due to policy violations: Spam detected

Rejected due to policy violations: Spam detected

[ummeegge]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 226 bytes --]

Hi all,
git send-email delivers currently 

5.7.1 Rejected due to policy violation: Spam detected. Refer to https://wiki.ipfire.org/postmaster for further information

Someone else with this problem ?

Best,

Erik

Re: Rejected due to policy violations: Spam detected

[Matthias Fischer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 592 bytes --]

Hi Erik,

On 08.04.2020 07:36, ummeegge wrote:
> Hi all,
> git send-email delivers currently 
> 
> 5.7.1 Rejected due to policy violation: Spam detected. Refer to https://wiki.ipfire.org/postmaster for further information
> 
> Someone else with this problem ?

Yes. Me. ;-)

Is there a URL in your commit? It could be that this URL is blacklisted
for some reasons.

I had exactly the same problem a few days before. Peter Müller sent me a
solution.

Look on the list and search for "Re: Commit is blocked due to "Policy
violation: Spam detected..." ;-)

HTH,
Matthias

Re: Rejected due to policy violations: Spam detected

[ummeegge]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 867 bytes --]

Hi Matthias,
thanks for the feedback. So, probably the link to the Sqlite changelog
is the problem ? No link to the changelog (or may others too) in that
case ?

Best,

Erik

Am Mittwoch, den 08.04.2020, 07:45 +0200 schrieb Matthias Fischer:
> Hi Erik,
> 
> On 08.04.2020 07:36, ummeegge wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > git send-email delivers currently 
> > 
> > 5.7.1 Rejected due to policy violation: Spam detected. Refer to 
> > https://wiki.ipfire.org/postmaster for further information
> > 
> > Someone else with this problem ?
> 
> Yes. Me. ;-)
> 
> Is there a URL in your commit? It could be that this URL is
> blacklisted
> for some reasons.
> 
> I had exactly the same problem a few days before. Peter Müller sent
> me a
> solution.
> 
> Look on the list and search for "Re: Commit is blocked due to "Policy
> violation: Spam detected..." ;-)
> 
> HTH,
> Matthias

Re: Rejected due to policy violations: Spam detected

[Peter Müller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 529 bytes --]

Hello Erik,

thanks for reporting this.

Unfortunately, sqlite[.]org resolves to 2600:3c00::f03c:91ff:fe96:b959, which
is currently blacklisted for sending spam. Apart from this, your mails look
fine...

May I ask you to simply put brackets between the last dot in the link, rendering
it unusable for machines? I am sorry that this causes trouble again, and it
is _very_ interesting to see how much other open source projects care about
their IP addresses' reputation. :-/

Thanks, and best regards,
Peter Müller

Re: Rejected due to policy violations: Spam detected

[ummeegge]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 880 bytes --]

Hello Peter,

Am Mittwoch, den 08.04.2020, 09:19 +0200 schrieb Peter Müller:
> Hello Erik,
> 
> thanks for reporting this.
Your welcome.
> 
> Unfortunately, sqlite[.]org resolves to
> 2600:3c00::f03c:91ff:fe96:b959, which
> is currently blacklisted for sending spam. Apart from this, your
> mails look
> fine...
Have no URLs somewhere in the mail.

> 
> May I ask you to simply put brackets between the last dot in the
> link, rendering
> it unusable for machines? 
Sure, you mean like this 
URL/changes(.)html
(can not post the URL so have shortend it) if so, it does not help
since the same message appears again.

> I am sorry that this causes trouble again, and it
> is _very_ interesting to see how much other open source projects care
> about
> their IP addresses' reputation. :-/
Yeah really interesting :-( .

> 
> Thanks, and best regards,
> Peter Müller

Best,

Erik

Re: Rejected due to policy violations: Spam detected

[Peter Müller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1228 bytes --]

Hello Erik,

thanks for your reply.

> Hello Peter,
> 
> Am Mittwoch, den 08.04.2020, 09:19 +0200 schrieb Peter Müller:
>> Hello Erik,
>>
>> thanks for reporting this.
> Your welcome.
>>
>> Unfortunately, sqlite[.]org resolves to
>> 2600:3c00::f03c:91ff:fe96:b959, which
>> is currently blacklisted for sending spam. Apart from this, your
>> mails look
>> fine...
> Have no URLs somewhere in the mail.

Well, rspamd thinks you have. :-)

> 
>>
>> May I ask you to simply put brackets between the last dot in the
>> link, rendering
>> it unusable for machines? 
> Sure, you mean like this 
> URL/changes(.)html
> (can not post the URL so have shortend it) if so, it does not help
> since the same message appears again.

No, I meant like: http://www.example[.]com/changes.html

> 
>> I am sorry that this causes trouble again, and it
>> is _very_ interesting to see how much other open source projects care
>> about
>> their IP addresses' reputation. :-/
> Yeah really interesting :-( .

Indeed. We are telling IT people they should monitor their IP address' reputations
for 20 years by now, and apparently, most of them give a shit on this.

Thanks, and best regards,
Peter Müller

Re: Rejected due to policy violations: Spam detected

[ummeegge]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1475 bytes --]

Am Mittwoch, den 08.04.2020, 10:22 +0200 schrieb Peter Müller:
> Hello Erik,
> 
> thanks for your reply.
> 
> > Hello Peter,
> > 
> > Am Mittwoch, den 08.04.2020, 09:19 +0200 schrieb Peter Müller:
> > > Hello Erik,
> > > 
> > > thanks for reporting this.
> > 
> > Your welcome.
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately, sqlite[.]org resolves to
> > > 2600:3c00::f03c:91ff:fe96:b959, which
> > > is currently blacklisted for sending spam. Apart from this, your
> > > mails look
> > > fine...
> > 
> > Have no URLs somewhere in the mail.
> 
> Well, rspamd thinks you have. :-)
Really, which one is this 8-) ?

> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > May I ask you to simply put brackets between the last dot in the
> > > link, rendering
> > > it unusable for machines? 
> > 
> > Sure, you mean like this 
> > URL/changes(.)html
> > (can not post the URL so have shortend it) if so, it does not help
> > since the same message appears again.
> 
> No, I meant like: http://www.example[.]com/changes.html
OK, got it. Thanks.

> 
> > 
> > > I am sorry that this causes trouble again, and it
> > > is _very_ interesting to see how much other open source projects
> > > care
> > > about
> > > their IP addresses' reputation. :-/
> > 
> > Yeah really interesting :-( .
> 
> Indeed. We are telling IT people they should monitor their IP
> address' reputations
> for 20 years by now, and apparently, most of them give a shit on
> this.
Yes, sad but true.

> 
> Thanks, and best regards,
> Peter Müller

Best,

Erik