Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62BB7200D3A for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 18:04:15 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 61108160BF4; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 17:04:15 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 599E7160BE4 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 18:04:14 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 89605 invoked by uid 500); 15 Nov 2017 17:04:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@spamassassin.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list users@spamassassin.apache.org Received: (qmail 89595 invoked by uid 99); 15 Nov 2017 17:04:12 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 17:04:12 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 09D421A0F74 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 17:04:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.999 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9KEeFiMZqjGQ for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 17:04:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.powerviewmail.com (mail.powerviewmail.com [204.9.77.40]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 1819960D6B for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 17:04:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [204.9.77.40] ([204.9.77.40]) by mail.powerviewmail.com (IceWarp 12.0.2.1 x64) with ASMTP id 201711151203592331 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:03:59 -0500 To: SA Mailing list From: Rob McEwen Subject: potential new SA feature: Direct DNS Querying Per DNSBL Zone Message-ID: <10893381-b523-ac10-8d2b-8ec53895f9a5@invaluement.com> Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:03:58 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------4A9E70356A0F4CD811946222" Content-Language: en-US X-PVSYS-AUTH: rob@powerviewsystems.com archived-at: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 17:04:15 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------4A9E70356A0F4CD811946222 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit RE: potential new SA feature: Direct DNS Querying Per DNSBL Zone A couple of months ago, I commissioned the development of a potential new feature in SA. The code is mostly already written, but has at least one significant bug. Therefore, it is currently in the SA Bugzilla – Bug 7477 https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7477 SUMMARY: (1) (optionally!) on a per-DNSBL basis, DNS queries to a particular DNSBL can be set to DIRECTLY query a particular designated DNS server (individually set for that particular DNSBL) --OR-- (2) (optionally!) on a per-DNSBL basis, DNS queries to a particular DNSBL can be set to DIRECTLY query that particular DNSBL's authoritative DNS server (in both cases, bypassing the regular DNS "middle man") ALSO: There is a cache component so that these DNSBL queries can be cached. DNSBLs *almost* don't need caching since most of them have such extremely short TTLs - HOWEVER - the problem with not caching is that there can often be bursts of *many* DNS lookups due to MANY similar spams being sent in close succession - THEREFORE - this caching component is critically important. Why is this "Direct DNS Querying Per DNSBL Zone" feature needed/important? (1) There have already been a few recent discussion threads on the SA lists where users have complained about their DNSBL lookups not working anymore - and then it was discovered that unknown or unwanted DNS settings (or setting changes) - caused major problems. This feature would enable more SA admins to have more "set it and forget it" success. (2) Some DESIRE than their main DNS queries (for their server that is running SA) default to particular 3rd party DNS servers, such as Google's DNS servers - yet they need particular DNSBL queries to go directly to the DNSBL's authoritative DNS servers (and they may not even be aware of that need!). Yes, this can be done with a local DNS server combined with forwarders and conditional forwarders - HOWEVER... (3) Some SA users do not have total control over their servers, and sometimes their DNS infrastructure and/or their DNS settings on their servers - CHANGE - without their knowledge or will. This was a primary motivation for my funding of this new feature (that is almost completed). While running the invaluement anti-spam blacklists - I've discovered that a LARGE percent of subscribers are continually having their DNS settings switched to either using Google's or OpenDNS's or their ISP's dns servers.  Then their queries to invaluement start to fail as we're not able to grant them access permissions from those IPs - nor are even able to distinguish such queries from others' queries. And even many of the (so-called) "free" DNSBLs have this same problem with their medium-sized customers who have moved into their paid access system AND are also doing directly queries (not RSYNC'ing the data). In fact, this problem is epidemic. Does it impact everyone? No. Does it impact you? Probably not. If you're reading this, you are probably one of the SA admins who DOES have more granularity of control and you probably already set up your own locally-hosted DNS server - and this all might sound like a solution looking for a problem... but then again, there have been those recent pesky SA list discussions that might not have existed if this feature were already implemented! And I see these issues FREQUENTLY with invaluement subscribers, especially with the numerous SA installations where the systems administrators didn't have as much control or knowledge as your average SA list participant. In many of these situations, the SA admin is a general IT guy who wears 100 different hats besides being the email and spam filtering admin. That admin is typically pulled a million different directions and would GREATLY benefit from a feature that allows MORE "set it and forget it". Forgive that person for not having as much SA and DNS knowledge stored in his brain as you probably have! Also, again, if this is accepted into official SA code, it will ALWAYS be an optional feature - that only impacts those DNSBLs for which it was specifically set up - other queries and other DNSBL lookups will continue to work as they always have. If you don't need or like this feature - just don't go out of your way to turn it on! Furthermore, this is NOT an intended replacement for running your own DNS caching server and pointing your SA queries to that. That is still the ideal/desired setup. Instead, this is for those who are unable to do that (or unable to do that reliably or without unexpected changes happening occasionally) AND it can also act as a sort of "insurance policy" to make sure that certain DNSBL queries continue to operate as intended, even if the DNS infrastructure changes unexpectedly or malfunctions. If anyone is interested in this feature and is willing/able to help get this completed - that would be greatly appreciated! NOTE: Once this feature is completed and bug free, it will then require the approval of the Apache Software Foundation (or something like that - I don't really understand their inner workings very well) - before it can be officially adopted. However, already, it has significant support from multiple important people! Therefore, I have high hopes that it will eventually earn this adoption, but that is not a guarantee and I have no control or say in that decision. But it makes the most sense to FIRST make this potential SA addition bug-free and outstanding - then cross that other bridge when we get there. Thanks to anyone who is willing/able to help with this. Please let me know if you have any questions. I'm also considering putting some kind of modest "bounty" on this - to fund anyone's efforts that either fix the remaining bugs, or at least make significant and measurable progress to that end - send me a private message off-list if that interests you! (I would do this myself, but Perl "looks like Greek" to me!) https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7477 -- Rob McEwen https://www.invaluement.com --------------4A9E70356A0F4CD811946222 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

RE: potential new SA feature: Direct DNS Querying Per DNSBL Zone

A couple of months ago, I commissioned the development of a potential new feature in SA. The code is mostly already written, but has at least one significant bug. Therefore, it is currently in the SA Bugzilla – Bug 7477

https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7477

SUMMARY:

(1) (optionally!) on a per-DNSBL basis, DNS queries to a particular DNSBL can be set to DIRECTLY query a particular designated DNS server (individually set for that particular DNSBL)
--OR--
(2) (optionally!) on a per-DNSBL basis, DNS queries to a particular DNSBL can be set to DIRECTLY query that particular DNSBL's authoritative DNS server

(in both cases, bypassing the regular DNS "middle man")

ALSO: There is a cache component so that these DNSBL queries can be cached. DNSBLs *almost* don't need caching since most of them have such extremely short TTLs - HOWEVER - the problem with not caching is that there can often be bursts of *many* DNS lookups due to MANY similar spams being sent in close succession - THEREFORE - this caching component is critically important.

Why is this "Direct DNS Querying Per DNSBL Zone" feature needed/important?

(1) There have already been a few recent discussion threads on the SA lists where users have complained about their DNSBL lookups not working anymore - and then it was discovered that unknown or unwanted DNS settings (or setting changes) - caused major problems. This feature would enable more SA admins to have more "set it and forget it" success.

(2) Some DESIRE than their main DNS queries (for their server that is running SA) default to particular 3rd party DNS servers, such as Google's DNS servers - yet they need particular DNSBL queries to go directly to the DNSBL's authoritative DNS servers (and they may not even be aware of that need!). Yes, this can be done with a local DNS server combined with forwarders and conditional forwarders - HOWEVER...

(3) Some SA users do not have total control over their servers, and sometimes their DNS infrastructure and/or their DNS settings on their servers - CHANGE - without their knowledge or will. This was a primary motivation for my funding of this new feature (that is almost completed). While running the invaluement anti-spam blacklists - I've discovered that a LARGE percent of subscribers are continually having their DNS settings switched to either using Google's or OpenDNS's or their ISP's dns servers.  Then their queries to invaluement start to fail as we're not able to grant them access permissions from those IPs - nor are even able to distinguish such queries from others' queries. And even many of the (so-called) "free" DNSBLs have this same problem with their medium-sized customers who have moved into their paid access system AND are also doing directly queries (not RSYNC'ing the data). In fact, this problem is epidemic. Does it impact everyone? No. Does it impact you? Probably not. If you're reading this, you are probably one of the SA admins who DOES have more granularity of control and you probably already set up your own locally-hosted DNS server - and this all might sound like a solution looking for a problem... but then again, there have been those recent pesky SA list discussions that might not have existed if this feature were already implemented! And I see these issues FREQUENTLY with invaluement subscribers, especially with the numerous SA installations where the systems administrators didn't have as much control or knowledge as your average SA list participant. In many of these situations, the SA admin is a general IT guy who wears 100 different hats besides being the email and spam filtering admin. That admin is typically pulled a million different directions and would GREATLY benefit from a feature that allows MORE "set it and forget it". Forgive that person for not having as much SA and DNS knowledge stored in his brain as you probably have!

Also, again, if this is accepted into official SA code, it will ALWAYS be an optional feature - that only impacts those DNSBLs for which it was specifically set up - other queries and other DNSBL lookups will continue to work as they always have. If you don't need or like this feature - just don't go out of your way to turn it on! Furthermore, this is NOT an intended replacement for running your own DNS caching server and pointing your SA queries to that. That is still the ideal/desired setup. Instead, this is for those who are unable to do that (or unable to do that reliably or without unexpected changes happening occasionally) AND it can also act as a sort of "insurance policy" to make sure that certain DNSBL queries continue to operate as intended, even if the DNS infrastructure changes unexpectedly or malfunctions.

If anyone is interested in this feature and is willing/able to help get this completed - that would be greatly appreciated!

NOTE: Once this feature is completed and bug free, it will then require the approval of the Apache Software Foundation (or something like that - I don't really understand their inner workings very well) - before it can be officially adopted. However, already, it has significant support from multiple important people! Therefore, I have high hopes that it will eventually earn this adoption, but that is not a guarantee and I have no control or say in that decision. But it makes the most sense to FIRST make this potential SA addition bug-free and outstanding - then cross that other bridge when we get there.

Thanks to anyone who is willing/able to help with this. Please let me know if you have any questions. I'm also considering putting some kind of modest "bounty" on this - to fund anyone's efforts that either fix the remaining bugs, or at least make significant and measurable progress to that end - send me a private message off-list if that interests you! (I would do this myself, but Perl "looks like Greek" to me!)

https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7477
-- 
Rob McEwen
https://www.invaluement.com



--------------4A9E70356A0F4CD811946222--