Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Matt Sergeant]

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 04:35, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 11:18:44PM -0500, Interservers Administration wrote:
> > McAfee SpamKiller(TM) Enterprise
> 
> Yeah, but "killer" makes me think of some guy named bubba with a
> baseball bat.  "assassin" is much more sexy.  Like using it makes you
> involved in some stealthy life of intrigue.
> 
> 
> Speaking of which -- anyone else here going to that spam conference
> at MIT?  I finally got the time off today so I went and registered.
> Should be interesting. :)

I'll be there talking about MessageLabs and a bit about SpamAssassin.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Matt Sergeant]

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 06:09, Jeff Morton wrote:
> Which brings me to a question... what exactly did they purchase?  If 
> they purchased Deersoft, does that give them the right to enforce the 
> trademark and prevent the open source Unix style SpamAssassin product 
> from using that name?  Do they hold patents that could shut down the 
> open source SA project?  Having seen Network Associates at work, it 
> wouldn't surprise me to see them enforce their patents and trademark as 
> soon as they have a vaguely marketable product under their own power. 
>  Note from the http://www.spamassassin.org/ homepage, 'SpamAssassin' is 
> a trademark of Deersoft, Inc.
> 
> I'm wondering if anyone can shed some light on the legal implications to 
> the open source SA project.  And please, assume a doomsday scenario, 
> since this is Network Associates we're talking about.

I have emails from Craig Hughes talking about the possibility of a
company buying out Deersoft and trying to be more restrictive on the use
of the SpamAssassin trademark. He assured me that they were somehow
protecting the name legally to ensure this can't happen, and gave me his
word that if they got bought out then part of the deal would be
protection of the use of the trademark by the open source project.

Of course the downside is we probably lose two good developers, as the
FAQ states that Justin and Craig will spend their time working on the
proprietary side of things. Does that mean the NAI version is a fork of
the open source version? Probably. Does that mean my working on
SpamAssassin is a conflict of interest (NAI is a competitor of ours)?
Probably. I'll have to talk to my boss about that.

Matt.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] spamd only forking single child

[Justin Mason]

Nathan Neulinger said:

> The comment above the snippet causing the problem is dated Dec 27th
> 2002, so probably not.
> 
> The waitpid loop was probably added to correct a zombie accumulation
> problem, but it had a more powerful effect than intended. It solved the
> zombie issue, but also prevented multiple child spawning. 

Yep, correct.

> On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 16:04, Mark wrote:
> > Does this bug exist in 2.43 too? If so, I have to recompile. :(
> > 
> > - Mark
> > 
> > 
> > - Original Message - 
> > From: "Neulinger, Nathan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 5:17 PM
> > Subject: RE: [SAtalk] spamd only forking single child
> > 
> > 
> > This change should fix it:
> > 
> > Index: spamd.raw
> > ==
> > RCS file: /cvsroot/spamassassin/spamassassin/spamd/spamd.raw,v
> > retrieving revision 1.159
> > diff -u -r1.159 spamd.raw
> > --- spamd.raw   1 Jan 2003 17:06:37 -   1.159
> > +++ spamd.raw   6 Jan 2003 16:16:41 -
> > @@ -988,7 +988,7 @@
> >my $kid;
> >do {
> >  $kid = waitpid(-1,&WNOHANG);
> > -  } until $kid == -1;
> > +  } while $kid > 0;
> >  }
> -- 
> 
> 
> Nathan Neulinger   EMail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> University of Missouri - Rolla Phone: (573) 341-4841
> Computing Services   Fax: (573) 341-4216
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> ___
> Spamassassin-talk mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
> 
> 


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] Smtp spam checking

[Gordon McDowall]

Hi

We are messing around at the moment with spam assassin as an smtp spam
scanner, it is working pretty well in conjunction with postfix.   Postfix is
set up to read its transport lists from a mysql server, we thought it would
be good if spam assassin could be configured on a per domain basis with
regard to white lists etc using mysql.   I know this can be done on a per
user basis for a server which is delivering locally but has anyone looked
into this on a per domain basis on an smtp server?I have spent a lot of
time looking into this and I am really stuck, any help would be appreciated!

Gordon McDowall


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] whitelist problem - help required :'(

[Thomas Kinghorn]

Good morning.

Firstly, happy new year, thanks for the help in 2002.

Now the problem.
Whitelist in local.cf does not seem to be working.
Shouldn't the whitelisted address have 0 hits?
I have restarted the spamd PID, no luck
header below.


Received: from mogwai.mtnns.net (diana [209.212.109.209]) by
protea.int.citec.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service
Version 5.5.2653.13)
id YRR4NRRC; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 09:15:06 +0200
Received: from protea.int.citec.net ([209.212.109.146]).

MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: test
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.2 required=4.5
tests=EXCHANGE_SERVER,SPAM_PHRASE_03_05
version=2.43
X-Spam-Level: 
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes

local.cf contains :
whitelist_from_rcvd *@mtnns.net   MTNNS.NET
whitelist_from_rcvd *@citec.net   CITEC.NET

Regards, 

Tom Kinghorn




---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] Goodbye

[Matt Sergeant]

Due to the recent aquisition of DeerSoft by NAI, a competitor of ours, I
have to quit working on this project. I'll still watch the mailing
lists, but I won't be able to make any contributions due to this
conflict of interest. I feel really gutted about this, since I'm very
committed to open source (as people who know my other Perl work know),
but I've never had something conflict with my job in this way, and so I
have to face reality - this company just isn't going to let me give code
away to a competitor.

So I say goodbye - so long and thanks for all the fish.

--

But...

There's two things to sort out before I go though: SA3 and CPAN
releases.

The CPAN releases issue is simple enough - Justin already has
permissions to upload SA releases so he can continue to do that assuming
it does not conflict with his job. If it does, someone can contact me
offline about it and we'll sort that out with the PAUSE admins.

SA3 is a little more complex, since it's code I was working on alone.
But sadly since this buyout happened before I could merge the code back
into the main SA branch (and before SA2.50, after which I was going to
do the merge) someone is going to have to take up the bat for SA3, or
see it languish and die (though it will probably live on in a
proprietary form here at MessageLabs).

Luckily the code in CVS is the latest - I didn't really get chance to
work on it over the holidays. Plus the code works - the only things left
to do are integrate it back into spamassassin and spamd scripts, and do
lots of cleanup, and re-merge all the rule changes from SA2.x.

So if you feel up to the rather large task of learning all the changes I
made (and why) and finishing everything off (I'll point you in the right
direction) and merging it back into HEAD, contact me offline and I'll go
through all the details with you. I'd prefer if the person wasn't Justin
or Craig though, for reasons that should be obvious.

Finally, can someone (Dan?) turn off my admin priviledges in the project
in sourceforge - I can't seem to do that myself. Once that's done I'll
remove myself from the project (if things change later I can always come
back on board).

Thanks everyone, and good luck with the fight against spam.

PS: I'll still talk about SpamAssassin at the Spam Conference next week
- it wouldn't be fair not to.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Lars Hansson]

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 18:16, Matt Sergeant wrote:

> Of course the downside is we probably lose two good developers, as the
> FAQ states that Justin and Craig will spend their time working on the
> proprietary side of things. Does that mean the NAI version is a fork of
> the open source version? Probably. Does that mean my working on
> SpamAssassin is a conflict of interest (NAI is a competitor of ours)?
> Probably. I'll have to talk to my boss about that.

That could mean losing 3 good developers then?
Just out of curiosity, how'd you figure they're a competitor?
They sell a consumer product, you sell a service. Does that
make them a direct competitor?


-- 
Lars Hansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Matt Sergeant]

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 11:44, Lars Hansson wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 18:16, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> 
> > Of course the downside is we probably lose two good developers, as the
> > FAQ states that Justin and Craig will spend their time working on the
> > proprietary side of things. Does that mean the NAI version is a fork of
> > the open source version? Probably. Does that mean my working on
> > SpamAssassin is a conflict of interest (NAI is a competitor of ours)?
> > Probably. I'll have to talk to my boss about that.
> 
> That could mean losing 3 good developers then?
> Just out of curiosity, how'd you figure they're a competitor?
> They sell a consumer product, you sell a service. Does that
> make them a direct competitor?

They sell a service too. McAffee.com. In fact they even stole the idea
off us (but that's another story ;-)

And yes, it's 3 developers lost. Shame.

Matt.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Lars Hansson]

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 20:40, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> They sell a service too. McAffee.com. In fact they even stole the idea
> off us (but that's another story ;-)

They do? Hmm..didnt know that. Then again,it's not like I browse their
site every, uh, year.
Can't say I'm surprised they stole the idea. They've gone seriously
downhill since they stopped being McAffee and started being NAI (or
joined NAI or whatever NAI came from). Ah, I remember back when all they
had was a DOS (and maybe OS/2, can't remember) commandline scanner.

> And yes, it's 3 developers lost. Shame.

Shame indeed but that's way it's gotta be, I suppose.


-- 
Lars Hansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] long delay in testing

[Kai Schaetzl]

Skye Poier wrote on Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:07:42 -0800:

> ^Tload: 0.03  cmd: perl 4643 [nanslp] 1.69u 0.27s 7% 13044k
> ^Tload: 0.03  cmd: perl 4643 [nanslp] 1.69u 0.27s 6% 13044k
>

I seem to have the same problem with a milter -> spamd solution which 
only waits ten seconds for spamd to respond. After adding a 
rbl-timeout of 5 seconds it seems to be gone.
Shouldn't the debug switch be a bit more verbose about this? It's not 
really clear that "forged_rcvd_trail" contains the RBL checks, not to 
mention that I would expect it to show the RBLs queried (and what 
they responded) with a *debug*.


Kai





---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] from and to the same and the white list

[Cezary Sliwa]

How do I prevent white-listing messages with my own e-mail address in the
"From:" field?

C.S.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Justin Mason]

Lars Hansson said:
> > And yes, it's 3 developers lost. Shame.
> 
> Shame indeed but that's way it's gotta be, I suppose.

By no means -- bear in mind I've been working for Deersoft for ~4 months
now, and Craig for longer.  Open source SpamAssassin is an incredibly
important part of the whole thing, and we've *been* working, and will be
still working, on it.  

In fact the last month or so of my time has been 100% on the OS stuff.
well, apart from all the packing I'm doing now for the move...

Also bear in mind that Deersoft (now NAI) controls just the trademark on
"SpamAssassin(tm)", and that the open source project is still just that --
an open source project.  There's no closing of the source involved (except
for their own proprietary modifications according to the terms of the
Artistic license).

--j.


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] PDF files attached are flagged as Spam

[Malte S. Stretz]

On Tuesday 07 January 2003 15:25 CET Pat Patton wrote:
> Any email that comes in with a PDF file attached is flagged as Spam. The
> message header shows X=Spam-Status: Yes hits=0 required=0. I have the
> required set to the default of 5. System is Redhat 7.2,  Spamassassin
> 2.43-2, Qmail 1.03. I am not seeing this problem with any other type
> attachments.

That sounds really weird. Are you sure that it happens only to messages with 
PDFs or do they have something else in common (same sender, mailer, etc.)? 
Could you try if this problem still occurs in 2.50-cvs (or forward me some 
message as an attachment so I can test it)?

If you tested it in 2.50-cvs and it still happens, could you please open a 
bug on [1] and attach some of these messages?

Cheers,
Malte

P.S.: Make sure you attach those messages including all headers; don't 
copy-and paste.

[1]http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Rose, Bobby]

Everyone seems more interested in the SA name than the project.  Is SA
still a completely open-source project now or does NAI have restrictions
or plan on introducing restrictions.  For example: if the open-source
project comes up with or adds some new algorithm of detection does that
automatically become NAI property which ends up in their commercial
product (like bayes in 2.50)!?  I'm certain that this contribution
relationship would only be one-way.

 

-Original Message-
From: Justin Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 9:35 AM
To: Lars Hansson
Cc: Matt Sergeant; SATalk
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition 



Lars Hansson said:
> > And yes, it's 3 developers lost. Shame.
> 
> Shame indeed but that's way it's gotta be, I suppose.

By no means -- bear in mind I've been working for Deersoft for ~4 months
now, and Craig for longer.  Open source SpamAssassin is an incredibly
important part of the whole thing, and we've *been* working, and will be
still working, on it.  

In fact the last month or so of my time has been 100% on the OS stuff.
well, apart from all the packing I'm doing now for the move...

Also bear in mind that Deersoft (now NAI) controls just the trademark on
"SpamAssassin(tm)", and that the open source project is still just that
-- an open source project.  There's no closing of the source involved
(except for their own proprietary modifications according to the terms
of the Artistic license).

--j.


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Strange Headers

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 05:39:43AM +0100, Maxime Ritter wrote:
> Can someone explain me what these headers are meaning :
> X-Spam-Warning: SpamAssassin ( http://www.spamassassin.org/ ) says this message is 
>SPAM
> X-Spam-Score: 10.2 (**)
> 
> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.15 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang)

One of the mail servers between the sender and yourself scanned the
message using MIMEDefang which called SpamAssassin.  It assigned a score
of 10.2 to the message indicating that it's likely to be spam.

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
But what can you do with it?  -- ubiquitous cry from Linux-user partner.
 (Submitted by Andy Pearce, [EMAIL PROTECTED])



msg11729/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

RE: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Steve Thomas]

Pardon my french, but this SUCKS. This is all the result of
sha^H^H^Hlawyers...

Are you sure that they can't differentiate between the OS project and the
commercial product? Yes, you'd be contributing to NAI's product, but you'd
also be contributing to my anti-spam efforts (which has zero to do with
NAI), as well as the anti-spam efforts of thousands of others, as well as OS
projects such as amavisd-new...



| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On 
| Behalf Of Matt Sergeant
| Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 3:21 AM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Cc: SATalk
| Subject: [SAtalk] Goodbye
| 
| 
| Due to the recent aquisition of DeerSoft by NAI, a competitor 
| of ours, I have to quit working on this project. ...




---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Vivek Khera]

> "MS" == Matt Sergeant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

MS> Due to the recent aquisition of DeerSoft by NAI, a competitor of ours, I
MS> have to quit working on this project. I'll still watch the mailing
MS> lists, but I won't be able to make any contributions due to this

This is indeed a bummer, but I just have to wonder why this event
really changes much.  You were giving your code to an open source
project that *anyone* could use (abiding by the license, of course).
Just because NAI now has essentially hired two of the major
developers, how does it change their ability to use the open source
code?

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vivek Khera, Ph.D.Khera Communications, Inc.
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   Rockville, MD   +1-240-453-8497
AIM: vivekkhera Y!: vivek_khera   http://www.khera.org/~vivek/


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[rmang]

> > And yes, it's 3 developers lost. Shame.
> 
> Shame indeed but that's way it's gotta be, I suppose.

Note: The following is a personal rant and is not indicative of any 
organization's or other people's opinions, nor is it from my right frame of 
mind :)

[BEGIN RANT]
I cannot disagree more with "but that's way it's gotta be, I suppose". I do 
not even know where to begin. I would first like to say that selling SA to 
Mcaffee without even a hint of this to the group, and with no regard to the 
open source model, is a slap in the face to the 1000's of people that have 
helped make this what it is today. Now, before people say they have a right 
to make a living, capitalize on an idea, etc..., I agree. But, when you start 
a project with the idea of bettering the community (Which is what SA was 
designed to do I believe), and it grows to affect the lives of millions of 
people (No exaggeration in numbers), you have a responsbility to the 
community that got you where you are. (More on this further down)

I see this acquisition as a sellout. Plain and simple. And this comes from a 
guy who has seen his fair share of business deals, and been approached 
to "sell out" as well. Why do I say this? Because Mcaffee does not embrace 
the open source model. Because they will pervert what this product has 
become. Because the owners did not stand up for what they believe and create 
something larger than themselves (Not a personal attack, just an 
observation). How can I say this? Let's look at some successful open source 
projects:

MySQL is the largest free database in the world, and a great example of how 
open source can work. They create a free product, get the world to help, and 
then build a corporation called MySQL that caters to both enterprises and the 
little guy. And guess what? They are a *very* profitable company along with 
enhancing the Internet community with a great open source product. They have 
helped more small businesses and students develop great software and sites 
becuase they remain committed to open source.

PHP is another great example. The most widely used scripting language in the 
world, and they have a corporate arm in Zend. Linux is the grand-daddy of 
them all, and RedHat proved you can be open source and make money too.

With SA, I saw them following in the footsteps of these great open source 
projects. They had the most widely used spam protection system, created a 
corporate company (Deersoft) to make money to continue the free project, and 
a community that was willing to help in any way it could, as spam affects us 
all. All they needed was a paid service to companies (ala MySQL) as an 
option, and companies would have lined up to pay for a great service and true 
support. I know mine would. In the past I have sung the praises of SA to my 
colleagues and business contacts as a great open source success story. Now it 
will be the punchline in my jokes and anecdotes about corporate greed.

Do the owners have the right to sell it? Yes, of course. Do they have the 
right to make money? Absolutely. Do they have a social repsonsiblity to the 
community? Definitely. Now before the attacks on the basis it is their 
project to do with it as they see fit, just a few things. They created SA to 
help the community fight spam. It was always touted as a free project, that 
would not be sold, but continue to evolve in the open source tradition (check 
the Archives for these posts). The trademark to was to preserve the SA 
project from hostile and commercial use. People joined this project and 
community based on these ideals and statements. And now the whole deal is 
owned by Mcaffee, a company that is against open source. Why not let the 
community know this was a possibility? I am sickened by the thought that my 
contributions to this project will now benefit a company that I strongly 
dislike, and I have no say in the matter.

Why is it that a company waves some money in front of you, and you abandon 
your ideals and goals for the "quick score"? You're right, I have no say in 
the matter, but I can voice my opinion about how I perceive this. And I 
perceive it as an affront to this great community. I wish the owners the 
best, and hope they will not regret like so many before them their choice to 
sell out to a company instead of trying to create something that not only 
brings them money, but the satisfaction of knowing that what they do betters 
mankind.
[END RANT]

Back on track, is there any talk of branching off this project into another 
open source project with a different name, and continuing the open source 
building? I have seen this done many times, such as Neomail to Open Webmail. 
Since Mcaffee now owns this project, who is the lead on it? Who is willing to 
stand up and take it on? Where do we stand? What about 2.50? I raise these 
questions as the project, to me, is in a dangerous state, and could collapse 
if there is not some strong leadership on the future of the open 

Re: [SAtalk] spamc and homedir

[Kai Schaetzl]

Justin Mason wrote on Mon, 06 Jan 2003 21:49:50 +:

> there are some patches now in the CVS version which do a lot of stuff with
> virtual users; might be worth taking a look.
>

I'm not too eager checking out the CVS version :-)
I think I have a similar problem with SA as Chris encountered. SA/spamd is 
too user-centric. Instead it should be able to take any token and check in 
the mysql database if there is a "name" like this. I don't know if spamd 
would accept usernames like "user@domain" but I assume it does not. If I 
remember correctly the sql schema for the database allows only for 8 
characters which is even somewhat scarce for "real" usernames.

This problem does not occur if you use procmail or similar to feed the 
messages to spamassassin because these mailers are only launched when 
sendmail has already figured out to which user to send to, so there's a 
homedir and "real" username. I'm currently checking out a solution with 
MailCorral/SA which looks quite promissing. MailCorral solves the problem of 
false positives quite neatly by "quarantining" all spam messages. It works 
as a sendmail milter, checks the mail for certain malicious content and then 
hands it over to spamd and waits for the response, possibly very similar to 
spamc. Currently it only hands over the username part of the recipient (or 
maybe it's spamd stripping the domain, I can't determine this, I just see a 
spamd message in the logs like "processing message <...> for 
username:spamd-userid", no message from the milter what it actually handed 
over). So, basically this means that *all* mail going thru the system is 
scanned and if messages to a@domain1, b@domain1 and c@domain1 all go to user 
d there's currently no way for SA to determine a user configuration. If it 
would get (which possibly won't be a problem for the MailCorral programmer 
if not already done so) and handle a fully qualified email address and use 
this for config lookup this would be much better. As an option which can be 
disabled in the local.cf, of course. Now, having configs for a lot of email 
addresses may be somewhat cumbersome to manage for the users, so I think an 
additional option to user per domain config settings instead of per user or 
per email address would be quite handy, especially for ISPs/Webhosting 
providers.

Is there something like that in the CVS or intended to implement in the near 
future? (Bad moment to ask now with the recent irritations about the 
NAI/Deersoft deal, I know.)


Kai

-- 

Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
IE-Center: http://ie5.de & http://msie.winware.org





---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 10:12:50AM -0500, Rose, Bobby wrote:
> Everyone seems more interested in the SA name than the project.  Is SA
> still a completely open-source project now or does NAI have restrictions
> or plan on introducing restrictions.  For example: if the open-source
> project comes up with or adds some new algorithm of detection does that
> automatically become NAI property which ends up in their commercial
> product (like bayes in 2.50)!?  I'm certain that this contribution
> relationship would only be one-way.

Standard disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on tv.

All (I believe) of the developers signed the "SPAMASSASSIN CONTRIBUTOR
CERTIFICATE", which says:

I have contributed code to the SpamAssassin project, and I did so, and
may continue to do so, under the following understanding:

a. When I submitted the code, I agreed that the code was to be
licensed for use under the same terms as Perl itself, that is terms of
either the Perl Artistic License (PAL), or version 1 or later of the
GNU General Public License (GPL), at the choice of the licensee.

b. The code which I submitted was specifically not licensed under
any license incompatible with this dual licensing.  I understand that
code licensed under the GPL or PAL alone might be incompatible with
this dual licensing, and I confirm that the code I submitted was in
fact not restricted in this way.

c. Any third party is free to use released versions of the code
under the terms of either the GPL or the PAL, and they can choose
which license they wish to use.



So the open source version stays open source.  NAI, and anyone else, can
take any piece of the code and use it in their product if they want to,
just like before.  I'd assume they'd use PAL since they probably don't
like GPL code...  However, since I believe their code isn't in Perl
(if it is they need to release the code in some form), they're probably
just using ideas from the open source version.  If it's a direct use
of code, just compiled, they need to point people at the open source
version, include their source, or the nebulous "make other distribution
arrangements with the Copyright Holder" which is Justin and/or Craig,
and I guess that part is up to your interpretation and paranoia level.

Or at least that's my interpretation of the PAL.

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Sometimes I think war is God's way of teaching us geography."
  - Paul Rodriguez



msg11734/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

RE: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Lars Hansson]

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 23:31, Steve Thomas wrote:
> Pardon my french, but this SUCKS. This is all the result of
> sha^H^H^Hlawyers...

Actually, I think it's a matter of money. Why should MessageLabs spend
time, money and effort to improve a product that NAI will simply use,
sell and make money on, especially if NAI wont contribute back much?
It costs a lot do do what MessageLab's are doing and actively helping
the competition isn't a good way to stay in business.

-- 
Lars Hansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 07:31:49AM -0800, Steve Thomas wrote:
> Are you sure that they can't differentiate between the OS project and the
> commercial product? Yes, you'd be contributing to NAI's product, but you'd
> also be contributing to my anti-spam efforts (which has zero to do with
> NAI), as well as the anti-spam efforts of thousands of others, as well as OS
> projects such as amavisd-new...

I have to say that I don't understand what the issue is exactly.
NAI could have used code/ideas before too.  The licensing on the OS code
hasn't changed, it's GPL or PAL based on what the end user wants to use.

Granted, NAI is now much more likely to use the code, or at least
rules/ideas anyway, but they could have done that before.

What if Microsoft decided to use the code/rules in the same way and
integrate into exchange/outlook?  There's nothing stopping them, and I
would consider that more dangerous than NAI for competition.

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise to complex, intelligent
 behavior.  Complex rules and regulations give rise to simple, stupid
 behavior." - Dee Hock, former CEO of Visa International



msg11736/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [SAtalk] PDF files attached are flagged as Spam

[up]

This is a bug in qmail-scanner 1.15 that chokes on any largish
attachments, not just pdf.  here's a quick patch that fixes the problem,
along with credit to the author (I posted this here a few weeks ago, but
here it goes again):

---
Basically, as of QS 1.15 (I think) Jason decided he wasn't going to
trust the return value from spamassassin, as there have been a number
of versions that don't work properly, so QS checks the values and marks
the mail as spam itself.
Unfortunately the test that is used is  score >= threshold, which is true
if they are both zero, which is the default case, as they both get set to
zero if there are any problems, or if the scanning is skipped because the
file is too big.

I have attached the patch that I use that specifically checks for score
and threshold = 0. This should only cause a problem if you have set your
threshold to 0.
The relevant line is below.
-  if ($sa_max > $sa_score) {
+  if (($sa_max > $sa_score) || ($sa_max == 0 && $sa_score == 0)) {

Hope this helps.
Chris Hine
-

BTW, qmail-scanner 1.16 will have this fixed, we've been told...

On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, Pat Patton wrote:

>
> Any email that comes in with a PDF file attached is flagged as Spam. The
> message header shows X=Spam-Status: Yes hits=0 required=0. I have the
> required set to the default of 5. System is Redhat 7.2,  Spamassassin
> 2.43-2, Qmail 1.03. I am not seeing this problem with any other type
> attachments.
>
>
>
> ---
> This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
> SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
> http://www.vasoftware.com
> ___
> Spamassassin-talk mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
>

James Smallacombe PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://3.am
=




---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] Thoughts...

[Tobias von Koch]

Although it is nice to hear that SA is becoming that successful -
even global players like NAI are getting interested in it -, the
acquisition of Deersoft by NAI will change - and has already changed -
the community project which SA is.

SA is licensed under the same terms as Perl itself, this means a dual
GPL / Artistic license. The Artistic license permits to keep
modifications to the licensed code proprietary.

As stated in [1], Network Associates is strongly devoted to the
"commercial software model" and "prefers to work with proprietary source
code".

It's a great pity that NAI will now profit from the GA, the rulebase,
the eval rules and the formidable Bayes filter without giving back
anything to the project - if I understand the NAI statements correctly.

It's a pity that competent developers have to leave the project because
of this.

It's a pity that one can't do anything to it, because what happens is in
full accordance with the license terms. 

A possible solution to avoid something like this happening to future SA
code again is to change the license terms of SA.

The LGPL, for example, would be a much better choice in my opinion.

The LGPL would still permit commercial users, such as MessageLabs and
also NAI, to use the SA modules in their proprietary software. It would,
however, force them to contribute all the changes, improvements and
bugfixes back to the community project. This would of course apply only
to code which is written in future (not the current codebase).

Any thoughts on this?

tobias

(just had to write this down last night. I don't know whether it's my
business to propose something like this [probably not], but I hate
writing something and then throwing it away for nothing)

[1]: http://www.mcafeeb2b.com/other/jump/deersoft-faq.asp


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Matt Sergeant]

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 15:40, Vivek Khera wrote:
> > "MS" == Matt Sergeant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> MS> Due to the recent aquisition of DeerSoft by NAI, a competitor of ours, I
> MS> have to quit working on this project. I'll still watch the mailing
> MS> lists, but I won't be able to make any contributions due to this
> 
> This is indeed a bummer, but I just have to wonder why this event
> really changes much.  You were giving your code to an open source
> project that *anyone* could use (abiding by the license, of course).
> Just because NAI now has essentially hired two of the major
> developers, how does it change their ability to use the open source
> code?

It doesn't. If we had found out that they were using it before aquiring
DeerSoft then I would have questioned my own contributions then.

Being bought by NAI doesn't change being able to use the code, but it
changes the situation (from "could" into "will").

Nothing is the end of the world, and maybe tomorrow things will look a
whole lot different, but for now I have to go into read-only mode. If we
were a public company things would be even worse (we'd have to justify
that to shareholders). It does make me wish I could be a fly on the wall
in a NAI shareholder meeting after this: "So how come you're funding
development of a project that our competitors use, but pay us nothing
for".

Anyway, lets not overreact to me leaving the project. I barely do any
CVS checkins these days - the lions share of the work is done by Dan
Quinlan, Justin and Theo these days. My leaving the project is just a
drop in the ocean.

Matt.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[Malte S. Stretz]

On Tuesday 07 January 2003 16:36 CET [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>[...]
> Back on track, is there any talk of branching off this project into
> another open source project with a different name, and continuing the
> open source building? I have seen this done many times, such as Neomail
> to Open Webmail. Since Mcaffee now owns this project, who is the lead on
> it? Who is willing to stand up and take it on? Where do we stand? What
> about 2.50? I raise these questions as the project, to me, is in a
> dangerous state, and could collapse if there is not some strong
> leadership on the future of the open source portion of SA.
>
> I apologize for my rant being so long, and if I am wrong in my
> assessments (and I hope I am for the sake of this project), please let me
> know. I have watched SA grow, and I would like to see the tradition
> continue.

It's mostly incorrect. SpamAssassin is still SpamAssassin, the Project 
continues. Nobody can buy an open source project and make it closed source 
without _all_ it's contributors agreeing on a license change. I for my own 
won't.

What has changed is:
* We lost three of the main developers (including the founder, Justin)
  (probably)
* We know that somebody big and evil will rape our project in future without
  giving a shit back to the community (very probably)

Regards,
Malte

-- 
Open Projects are made of Open Discussions.
  -- Me



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] What's this caused by?

[Mike Saunders]

This is happening to several emails coming from the SA-talk list today.
Any idea what's causing it?  I'm using postfix for the mail server, cyrus
for the store, and pine to read the email.  This is only happening to
SA-talk mail:

[Error: Formatting error: Non-hexadecimal character in QP encoding]



-Mike Saunders
method at method dot cx



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Martin Schroeder]

On 2003-01-07 10:12:50 -0500, Rose, Bobby wrote:
> or plan on introducing restrictions.  For example: if the open-source
> project comes up with or adds some new algorithm of detection does that
> automatically become NAI property which ends up in their commercial
> product (like bayes in 2.50)!?  I'm certain that this contribution

Nope. SA's license is GPL/Artistic.

Best regards
Martin

PS: Learn to quote, please.
-- 
 http://www.tm.oneiros.de/calendar/2003/



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Malte S. Stretz]

On Tuesday 07 January 2003 16:46 CET Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 10:12:50AM -0500, Rose, Bobby wrote:
> > Everyone seems more interested in the SA name than the project.  Is SA
> > still a completely open-source project now or does NAI have
> > restrictions or plan on introducing restrictions.  For example: if the
> > open-source project comes up with or adds some new algorithm of
> > detection does that automatically become NAI property which ends up in
> > their commercial product (like bayes in 2.50)!?  I'm certain that this
> > contribution relationship would only be one-way.
>
> Standard disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on tv.

dito.

>[...] However, since I believe their code isn't in Perl
> (if it is they need to release the code in some form), they're probably
> just using ideas from the open source version.  

I'm not too sure. Aren't the "ideas" protected by the License, too? We're 
now entering the nebulous field of software patents and friends. Can you 
"license" an algorithm or just the program, the collection of algorithms?

> If it's a direct use
> of code, just compiled, they need to point people at the open source
> version, include their source, or the nebulous "make other distribution
> arrangements with the Copyright Holder" which is Justin and/or Craig,
> and I guess that part is up to your interpretation and paranoia level.

Nope. Everybody holds the copyright for his part of the code. Eg. all rules 
you ever contributed to SA are still copyrighted by you. You and me never 
signed anything giving our ideas to somebody else. It's "Copyright 
2000-2002 Justin Mason and others" and the others are many :o)

I think they'll try it through PAL §3c. But then they have to state 
explicitly whet they have changed.

> Or at least that's my interpretation of the PAL.

Regards,
Malte


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Rewriting Subjects with report_safe 0 not possible in 2.5?!

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 03:29:40PM +0100, Stefan Seiz wrote:
> Now since i did set report-safe to 0, SUBJECTS of tagged messages are no
> longer prefixed with "[Possible SPAM]".
> Is this done on purpose?
> 
> How can i get back the behaviour of 2.43 which prefixed the subjects, put
> the report in the header without attaching the original mail?

No, just a bug. :)

I just added the code back in to do subject rewriting if doing
"report_safe 0". :)

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Please do not blame Sendmail for every problem in the world." - Wietse Venema



msg11744/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[Ross Vandegrift]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 10:36:57AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I see this acquisition as a sellout. Plain and simple. And this comes from a 
> guy who has seen his fair share of business deals, and been approached 
> to "sell out" as well. Why do I say this? Because Mcaffee does not embrace 
> the open source model.

Whoa dude calm down there.  It's only a sellout if things go south.
There's no immediate reason to expect things to get worse for the
community.  SA is GPL dual-licensed - it *can't* really be sold out.  If
NAI takes it somewhere you don't like, give them the finger and fork it.
Free software is a wonderful thing.

Sheesh - at least give them a chance!

-- 
Ross Vandegrift
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

A Pope has a Water Cannon.   It is a Water Cannon.
He fires Holy-Water from it.It is a Holy-Water Cannon.
He Blesses it. It is a Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He Blesses the Hell out of it.  It is a Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He has it pierced.It is a Holey Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He makes it official.   It is a Canon Holey Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
Batman and Robin arrive.   He shoots them.


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Chris Santerre]

"My leaving the project is just a drop in the ocean."
That will send out ripples! 

I think Your situation will be discussed more then you think. The idea of
this happening has a major impact on open source. What if NAI suddenly hired
Dan Quinlan, Justin and Theo? Then we go from major contributors to NAI
taking a lot of the power behind an open project. 

He who controls the purse strings kind of thing!



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] spamc and homedir

[Rick Macdougall]

Hi,

spamc has no such restriction.  All that needs to be done is increase the
size of the field in the MySQL database.  We use it here with great success.

Regards,

Rick

- Original Message -
From: "Kai Schaetzl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc and homedir


Justin Mason wrote on Mon, 06 Jan 2003 21:49:50 +:

> there are some patches now in the CVS version which do a lot of stuff with
> virtual users; might be worth taking a look.
>

I'm not too eager checking out the CVS version :-)
I think I have a similar problem with SA as Chris encountered. SA/spamd is
too user-centric. Instead it should be able to take any token and check in
the mysql database if there is a "name" like this. I don't know if spamd
would accept usernames like "user@domain" but I assume it does not. If I
remember correctly the sql schema for the database allows only for 8
characters which is even somewhat scarce for "real" usernames.

This problem does not occur if you use procmail or similar to feed the
messages to spamassassin because these mailers are only launched when
sendmail has already figured out to which user to send to, so there's a
homedir and "real" username. I'm currently checking out a solution with
MailCorral/SA which looks quite promissing. MailCorral solves the problem of
false positives quite neatly by "quarantining" all spam messages. It works
as a sendmail milter, checks the mail for certain malicious content and then
hands it over to spamd and waits for the response, possibly very similar to
spamc. Currently it only hands over the username part of the recipient (or
maybe it's spamd stripping the domain, I can't determine this, I just see a
spamd message in the logs like "processing message <...> for
username:spamd-userid", no message from the milter what it actually handed
over). So, basically this means that *all* mail going thru the system is
scanned and if messages to a@domain1, b@domain1 and c@domain1 all go to user
d there's currently no way for SA to determine a user configuration. If it
would get (which possibly won't be a problem for the MailCorral programmer
if not already done so) and handle a fully qualified email address and use
this for config lookup this would be much better. As an option which can be
disabled in the local.cf, of course. Now, having configs for a lot of email
addresses may be somewhat cumbersome to manage for the users, so I think an
additional option to user per domain config settings instead of per user or
per email address would be quite handy, especially for ISPs/Webhosting
providers.

Is there something like that in the CVS or intended to implement in the near
future? (Bad moment to ask now with the recent irritations about the
NAI/Deersoft deal, I know.)


Kai

--

Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
IE-Center: http://ie5.de & http://msie.winware.org





---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 05:23:44PM +0100, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> continues. Nobody can buy an open source project and make it closed source 
> without _all_ it's contributors agreeing on a license change. I for my own 
> won't.

And the license change only effects new code.  You can't relicense already
published code.  I'm not going to be closing off my code either, so ...

> * We know that somebody big and evil will rape our project in future without
>   giving a shit back to the community (very probably)

All of this stuff remains to be seen.  I don't have a lot of faith in
NAI since I haven't touched one of their products in so long that I
didn't know they had something other than the AV product.

I doubt they'll give code back to the OS project since I don't believe
they use perl in their code.  So what they can offer is: 1) algorithms,
2) rules, 3) money for further development (be it to the developers,
hosting web/ftp/etc, paying Justin/Craig/etc and letting them continue
working on the OS version, etc.)

Will they do any of it?  Remains to be seen.  The biggest sticking point,
IMHO, isn't 1 or 2 but 3, and specifically the "continue working on
the OS version" part.  Most companies that I've been at have a clause
in the employment agreement that basically says "anything you think or
do is our property", and therefore anything that gets thought of as an
idea becomes NAI IP, and is unlikely to make it back into the OS version.
However, Justin/Craig/etc are pretty smart folks I've seen, so if working
on the OS code (or any OS code for that matter) is important to them,
I'm sure they've already worked this out.


At the moment, I'm less concerned about "will SA continue" as I am about
getting 2.50 out.  But that's another discussion.

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
> No manual is ever necessary.
 May I politely interject here: BULLSHIT.  That's the biggest Apple lie of all!
 (Discussion in comp.os.linux.misc on the intuitiveness of interfaces.)



msg11748/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Robert J. Accettura]

So... whose left?



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

RE: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Rose, Bobby]

So if SA is still opensource and all the confusion is coming from the
fact that NAI owns the SA name and not the project tree, why not just
change the name.  Everyone seems to be thinking that NAI owns the
SpamAssassin project now and will rape it and leave it for dead the way
they did PGP. I think the status of the project needs to get clarified
ASAP to keep people from bailing and leading to the fragmentation of
ideas spread across other antispam projects.  

I wish we could get more info from Justin or Craig to clear up
everything.  Justin's last message did raise some concern with the
remark of "There's no closing of the source involved (except for their
own (Deersoft now NAI) proprietary modifications according to the terms
of the Artistic license)."  What code that is in SA does this include?

-Original Message-
From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 10:56 AM
To: Steve Thomas
Cc: 'Matt Sergeant'; 'SATalk'
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Goodbye


On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 07:31:49AM -0800, Steve Thomas wrote:
> Are you sure that they can't differentiate between the OS project and 
> the commercial product? Yes, you'd be contributing to NAI's product, 
> but you'd also be contributing to my anti-spam efforts (which has zero

> to do with NAI), as well as the anti-spam efforts of thousands of 
> others, as well as OS projects such as amavisd-new...

I have to say that I don't understand what the issue is exactly. NAI
could have used code/ideas before too.  The licensing on the OS code
hasn't changed, it's GPL or PAL based on what the end user wants to use.

Granted, NAI is now much more likely to use the code, or at least
rules/ideas anyway, but they could have done that before.

What if Microsoft decided to use the code/rules in the same way and
integrate into exchange/outlook?  There's nothing stopping them, and I
would consider that more dangerous than NAI for competition.

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise to complex, intelligent
behavior.  Complex rules and regulations give rise to simple, stupid
behavior." - Dee Hock, former CEO of Visa International


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SAtalk] spamc and homedir

[Neulinger, Nathan]

FYI, works just fine. We've deployed it here using the full email as the key. We just 
made the field longer. 

Small improvement to config would be nice if you could specify field names in the 
config as well as the table name. Just so that we could name the field 'email' instead 
of 'username'. 

-- Nathan


Nathan Neulinger   EMail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
University of Missouri - Rolla Phone: (573) 341-4841
Computing Services   Fax: (573) 341-4216


> -Original Message-
> From: Rick Macdougall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 10:57 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc and homedir
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> spamc has no such restriction.  All that needs to be done is 
> increase the
> size of the field in the MySQL database.  We use it here with 
> great success.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rick
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Kai Schaetzl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 10:32 AM
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc and homedir
> 
> 
> Justin Mason wrote on Mon, 06 Jan 2003 21:49:50 +:
> 
> > there are some patches now in the CVS version which do a 
> lot of stuff with
> > virtual users; might be worth taking a look.
> >
> 
> I'm not too eager checking out the CVS version :-)
> I think I have a similar problem with SA as Chris 
> encountered. SA/spamd is
> too user-centric. Instead it should be able to take any token 
> and check in
> the mysql database if there is a "name" like this. I don't 
> know if spamd
> would accept usernames like "user@domain" but I assume it 
> does not. If I
> remember correctly the sql schema for the database allows only for 8
> characters which is even somewhat scarce for "real" usernames.
> 
> This problem does not occur if you use procmail or similar to feed the
> messages to spamassassin because these mailers are only launched when
> sendmail has already figured out to which user to send to, so 
> there's a
> homedir and "real" username. I'm currently checking out a 
> solution with
> MailCorral/SA which looks quite promissing. MailCorral solves 
> the problem of
> false positives quite neatly by "quarantining" all spam 
> messages. It works
> as a sendmail milter, checks the mail for certain malicious 
> content and then
> hands it over to spamd and waits for the response, possibly 
> very similar to
> spamc. Currently it only hands over the username part of the 
> recipient (or
> maybe it's spamd stripping the domain, I can't determine 
> this, I just see a
> spamd message in the logs like "processing message <...> for
> username:spamd-userid", no message from the milter what it 
> actually handed
> over). So, basically this means that *all* mail going thru 
> the system is
> scanned and if messages to a@domain1, b@domain1 and c@domain1 
> all go to user
> d there's currently no way for SA to determine a user 
> configuration. If it
> would get (which possibly won't be a problem for the 
> MailCorral programmer
> if not already done so) and handle a fully qualified email 
> address and use
> this for config lookup this would be much better. As an 
> option which can be
> disabled in the local.cf, of course. Now, having configs for 
> a lot of email
> addresses may be somewhat cumbersome to manage for the users, 
> so I think an
> additional option to user per domain config settings instead 
> of per user or
> per email address would be quite handy, especially for ISPs/Webhosting
> providers.
> 
> Is there something like that in the CVS or intended to 
> implement in the near
> future? (Bad moment to ask now with the recent irritations about the
> NAI/Deersoft deal, I know.)
> 
> 
> Kai
> 
> --
> 
> Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
> Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
> IE-Center: http://ie5.de & http://msie.winware.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
> SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
> http://www.vasoftware.com
> ___
> Spamassassin-talk mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
> SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld =omething 2 See!
> http://www.vasoftware.com
> ___
> Spamassassin-talk mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
> 


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lis

Re: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 11:59:58AM -0500, Chris Santerre wrote:
> this happening has a major impact on open source. What if NAI suddenly hired
> Dan Quinlan, Justin and Theo? Then we go from major contributors to NAI
> taking a lot of the power behind an open project. 

That depends -- if they hired me to work on the OS version?  I could
live with that.  ;)

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
I bet Einstein turned himself all sorts of colors before he invented the
 lightbulb.
 
-- Homer Simpson
   Bart the Genius



msg11752/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[Mark]

- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "SATalk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

> I apologize for my rant being so long, and if I am wrong in my
> assessments (and I hope I am for the sake of this project), please let me
> know. I have watched SA grow, and I would like to see the tradition
> continue.

I agree with everything you said in your rant. :) SA could have become a
great, world-wide effort to stop spam; then someone dangles a few green
carrots in front of someone's eyes, and wham, we're collectively screwed
again. :(

If you invite people, as a collective effort, to better the product together
with you, having them believe they are working on a community project, then
you should afford them, if not a legal, then certainly the moral courtesy to
inform them that you plan to cash in on the project, subsequently, have the
decency to consult them on it. That leaves them the choice to divert their
time and energy to true Open Source projects.

- Mark

System Administrator Asarian-host.org

---
"Greed killed the cat."



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] Hispeedmedia: spam with images as content

[Kai Schaetzl]

I'm new to SA and not using the devel version 2.50 but 2.43, so maybe 
this is already solved there?
Lately, we are getting a LOT of spam from a vendor which seems to 
call itself HiSpeedMedia or HSM. They use several custom "list" 
domains (f.i. hsm2282jende119283000send.com, 
4list-11873649hsm987.com, list11873649hsm987.com, 
hsmdatabaseclump182643, hsmlistcluster182643library.com) specifically 
registered just for spamming and "one-day use" and include an invalid 
HTML body which builds the message from images only. They seem to 
spam only email addresses they harvested from whois, I'm not getting 
this on other email accounts. Since there's not much text in them SA 
has only the header for some scoring and only achieves between 1 and 
3.5, mostly around or less than 2. SA isn't able to detect even one 
of them as spam (using the default limit of 5) and, more or less, 
these count for most of the misses SA has on the spam.
The Bayes-Filter in 2.50 may help on these but I also think about 
some improvements in the "normal" parsing. F.i. counting the images 
and the hrefs in an HTML block and exposing this as HTML_IMAGE_COUNT 
or so might be worthwhile, so that we could then give it easily a 
score. What do you think?

Here's a sample, it scores in these areas (DATE_IN_PAST_06_12 
possibly because I did this test today). Note, this is the highest 
score I found for this kind of messages, others are much lower.

score=3.8 required=5 
tests=BIG_FONT,CTYPE_JUST_HTML,DATE_IN_PAST_06_12,HTML_COMMENT_UNIQUE
_ID,JAVASCRIPT,PORN_4,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,SUPERLONG_LINE,WEB_BUGS

Received: from ts1.hsmlistcluster182643.com 
(ts1.hsmlistcluster182643.com [64.70.17.71])
   by conactive.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA11314
   for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 06:55:22 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.0.1.16]
   by ts1.hsmlistcluster182643.com (10.0.1.36) with QMQP; 04 Jan 2003 
21:55:39 +
Message-Id: <1sbl16$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 07:16:01 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: DreamRight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Start making money early this year
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer-Version: v 21381589
Content-type: text/html

http://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?i=2189Przwfstw21
381589.gif" border=0 height=1 width=1>

http://tfs2.hsmlistcluster182643.com/images/header/headerHSM.gif
">





http://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?j=2189Przwfstw21
381589hPoszEtY186.html>http://www.wealth-toolkit.com/multiplestreams14/marketing/millio
naire_r1_c1.gif"

width=187 border=0 name=millionaire_r1_c1>http://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?j=2189Przwfstw21
381589hPoszEtY186.html>http://www.wealth-toolkit.com/multiplestreams14/marketing/millio
naire_r1_c3.gif"

width=316 border=0 name=millionaire_r1_c3>http://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?j=2189Przwfstw21
381589hPoszEtY186.html>http://www.wealth-toolkit.com/multiplestreams14/marketing/millio
naire_r2_c1.gif"

width=187 border=0 name=millionaire_r2_c1>http://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?j=2189Przwfstw21
381589hPoszEtY186.html>http://www.wealth-toolkit.com/multiplestreams14/marketing/millio
naire_r2_c3.gif"

width=267 border=0 name=millionaire_r2_c3>http://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?j=2189Przwfstw21
381589hPoszEtY186.html>http://www.wealth-toolkit.com/multiplestreams14/marketing/spacer
gif"

width=49 border=0 name=millionaire_r2_c4>http://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?j=2189Przwfstw2
1381589hPoszEtY186.html">http://www.wealth-toolkit.com/multiplestreams14/marketing/millio
naire_r3_c1.gif"

width=107 border=0 name=millionaire_r3_c1>http://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?j=2189Przwfstw21
381589hPoszEtY186.html>http://www.wealth-toolkit.com/multiplestreams14/marketing/millio
naire_r3_c2.gif"

width=396 border=0 name=millionaire_r3_c2>http://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?j=2189Przwfstw21
381589hPoszEtY186.html>http://www.wealth-toolkit.com/multiplestreams14/marketing/button
1.gif"

width=150 border=0 alt=""> http://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?j=2189Przwfstw21
381589hPoszEtY186.html>view herehttp://pxe.hsmlistcluster182643.com/logic/oh.pl?j=2189Przwfstw21
381589hPoszEtY186.html>Well would

you?



To

discontinue the receipt of emails, visit the following link:

http://hsmlistcluster182643.com/cgi-bin/ohun.cgi?e
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://hsmlistcluster182643.com/cgi-

bin/lohun.cgi">http://tfs2.hsmlistcluster182643.com/images/header/footjoy.gif"; 
border="0"

alt="">


Kai






---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceFor

[SAtalk] Report not cleaning up after itself?

[Michael Parker]

Howdy,

I'm seeing some behavior with spamassassin -r where it's not removing
the bayes.lock file after it finishes the run.

I recently installed (as of 1/5) a copy from CVS (it passed all tests)
and turned on all of the Bayesian stuff, ran the learn scripts and got
it all working.  I left auto_learn set to on.  Now, when I try to run
spamassassin -r it locks the bayesian stuff but looks like it doesn't
cleanup after itself, so any other reports fail to get the lock.

I'd update to the latest CVS but it's failing on a bunch of spamd
tests right now, but I don't see any changes that would change the
behavior.

Anyone have any ideas?  Here is a piece of the debug output:

parker@mail:~> spamassassin -D -r < spam2.txt 
debug: using "/home/parker/.spamassassin" for user state dir
debug: bayes: tie-ing to DB file R/O /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes_toks
debug: bayes: tie-ing to DB file R/O /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes_seen
debug: Score set 3 chosen.
debug: using "/usr/share/spamassassin" for default rules dir
debug: using "/etc/mail/spamassassin" for site rules dir
debug: using "/home/parker/.spamassassin" for user state dir
debug: using "/home/parker/.spamassassin/user_prefs" for user prefs file
debug: Initialising learner
debug: using "/home/parker/.spamassassin" for user state dir
debug: lock: created /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes.lock.mail.3464
debug: lock: 3464 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 0
debug: lock: link to /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes.lock ok
debug: lock: unlinked /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes.lock.mail.3464
debug: bayes: tie-ing to DB file R/W /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes_toks
debug: bayes: tie-ing to DB file R/W /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes_seen
debug: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: already learnt correctly, not 
learning twice
debug: Razor2 is available
 Razor-Log: Computed razorhome from env: /home/parker/.razor
 Razor-Log: Found razorhome: /home/parker/.razor
[ Then all of the Razor Stuff ]

Here is one from a subsequent run:

parker@mail:~> spamassassin -D -r < spam3.txt 
debug: using "/home/parker/.spamassassin" for user state dir
debug: bayes: tie-ing to DB file R/O /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes_toks
debug: bayes: tie-ing to DB file R/O /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes_seen
debug: Score set 3 chosen.
debug: using "/usr/share/spamassassin" for default rules dir
debug: using "/etc/mail/spamassassin" for site rules dir
debug: using "/home/parker/.spamassassin" for user state dir
debug: using "/home/parker/.spamassassin/user_prefs" for user prefs file
debug: Initialising learner
debug: using "/home/parker/.spamassassin" for user state dir
debug: lock: created /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes.lock.mail.3496
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 0
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 1
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 2
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 3
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 4
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 5
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 6
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 7
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 8
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 9
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 10
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 11
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 12
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 13
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 14
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 15
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 16
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 17
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 18
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 19
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 20
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 21
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 22
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 23
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 24
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 25
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 26
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get lock on /home/parker/.spamassassin/bayes pass 27
debug: lock: 3496 trying to get

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Gerald Oskoboiny]

* Diffenderfer, Randy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-01-06 21:32-0500]
> Did anyone see in the NAI announcement that its first product (due in Q2)
> will be named...
> 
> McAfee SpamKiller(TM) Enterprise
> 
> And they had the "nerve" to trademark that! :-)))  Don't even have to get my
> thesaurus out for that one! :-)

SpamKiller is an existing (buggy) McAfee product:

http://www.mcafee.com/myapps/msk/default.asp

(spamkiller was acquired from Novasoft in May 2002, but it dates
back to 1997 or so)

-- 
Gerald Oskoboiny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://impressive.net/people/gerald/


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Thoughts...

[Scot Wilcoxon]

SA is licensed under the same terms as Perl itself, this means a dual
GPL / Artistic license. The Artistic license permits to keep
modifications to the licensed code proprietary.


Gee, can someone make mods to SA and place them only under the GPL, and 
thus create a branch of SA which is only under the GPL?  The license 
notices should be modified to indicate which version this is.

The author of the mods which are placed under the GPL can also release 
the mods to the Public Domain or use different executable names, so as 
to meet the Artistic License requirements.  It looks like the Artistic 
License only requires that mods be made PD, and that could be done by 
the mod author releasing ONLY A DIFF FILE to the PD.  Note that Public 
Domain is different from a licensed version.  The Artistic License does 
not seem to require that modifications be released under the Artistic 
License, so the author of the GPL-only mods can choose whether or not to 
release a version under his Artistic License.

It wouldn't block anyone from patching a GPL/Artistic copy if they want 
to maintain the original branch -- but they'll have to update the proper 
license notices.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SAtalk] spamc and homedir

[Chris Petersen]

> FYI, works just fine. We've deployed it here using the full email as
> the key. We just made the field longer. 

hmm, maybe I'll have to look into this.  shouldn't be too hard to add
courier auth tool support to spamd so I wouldn't have to set up a
separate mysql database for this kind of thing.  For now, though, I'll
probably just be lazy and see what comes out of the cvs version.

Unless one of the developers would like to elaborate on these changes?

-Chris



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Robin Lynn Frank]

On Tuesday 07 January 2003 04:21 am, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Due to the recent aquisition of DeerSoft by NAI, a competitor of ours, I
> have to quit working on this project. I'll still watch the mailing
> lists, but I won't be able to make any contributions due to this
> conflict of interest. I feel really gutted about this, since I'm very
> committed to open source (as people who know my other Perl work know),
> but I've never had something conflict with my job in this way, and so I
> have to face reality - this company just isn't going to let me give code
> away to a competitor.
>
> So I say goodbye - so long and thanks for all the fish.
>
> --
You will be missed, but I understand the spot you are in.  Having seen what 
NAI did to PGP, I stay very far away from them.
-- 
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
==
Robin Lynn Frank - Director of Operations - Paradigm-Omega, LLC
No attachments or active content is permitted in incoming mail.
Copyright and PGP/GPG info in mail or message headers.
Free email addresses are not accepted.  ICQ:  147240022
==


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition, Goodbye, etc.

[Ray Dzek]

Put the tears on hold.  Put the knee-jerk in neutral.  Put the soap boxes
away.  Lay your weapons on the ground and step away slowly.

Nobody knows how this is going to shake out yet.  It could be days, weeks,
or longer until the ramifications, if any, are fully known.  Matt could be
back tomorrow.  NAI could send every SA users a cease and desist letter.
The Sun could nova.  I could win the lottery.

So everybody take a deep breath.  And no, you can't share my winnings.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Thoughts...

[Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder]

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 17:13, Tobias von Koch wrote:
[...]
> A possible solution to avoid something like this happening to future SA
> code again is to change the license terms of SA.
> 
> The LGPL, for example, would be a much better choice in my opinion.
> 
> The LGPL would still permit commercial users, such as MessageLabs and
> also NAI, to use the SA modules in their proprietary software. It would,
> however, force them to contribute all the changes, improvements and
> bugfixes back to the community project. This would of course apply only
> to code which is written in future (not the current codebase).

Just this: there's a huge difference between honouring the terms of the
LGPL (or the classical GPL, for that matter) and 'contributing changes
to the community'.

GCC is a good example. Apple is really contributing: they have hacked a
lot on the Objective-C++ part, and now there's discussion going on how
to get this into the main GCC sourcebase. [disclaimer: I never knew what
came of this effort as I quit the job where I was involved with gcc.]

A small embedded linux company I had to do with recently is the
opposite: they also hacked gcc, but they didn't contribute the changes
to the project. They followed the letter of the GPL: if you bought the
devel kit with their gcc, you also got the full source. As a big
tarball, without any documentation on what they'd done and why. Yes, in
theory it is possible to diff the code and try to understand what
they've done. In practice it's probably easier to rewrite the thing if
someone ever needs the same functionality. [Said company doesn't exist
anymore.]

So, even changing the license doesn't change anything fundamental. If a
company doesn't want to contribute to the community, it can just follow
the license to the letter and still be all assholes.

cheers
-- vbi

-- 
featured link: http://fortytwo.ch/gpg/subkeys



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[SAtalk] Guidelines for Mass Mailings

[Steve Evans]

I have a few users who want to know how to send mass mailings and not
get in trouble for sending spam.  Does anyone know of a website with
guidelines that talk about opt-in/opt-out, how to know who you can send
mass mailings to, what kind of wording to use for the opt-out, etc.

Steve Evans
SDSU Foundation
(619) 594-0653 


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition

[Michael Shields]

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Rose, Bobby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For example: if the open-source
> project comes up with or adds some new algorithm of detection does that
> automatically become NAI property which ends up in their commercial
> product (like bayes in 2.50)!?

Note that the Bayes algorithm and everything else in the development
version is already "distributed"; the GPL does not distinguish between
being part of a "release" or not.  Even if NAI were the most evil
people in the world, the project could still continue on from the
existing 2.50 base (or from any other version).

OpenSSH is a good example of this; the developers of the original ssh
started restricting the license of later versions, so a team began to
develop it using an old free release as a base.
http://www.openssh.org/history.html

It would be nice to see a statement from the Deersoft principals
about what is going to happen, however, instead of seeing all this
speculation.
-- 
Shields.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Guidelines for Mass Mailings

[Vivek Khera]

> "SE" == Steve Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

SE> I have a few users who want to know how to send mass mailings and not
SE> get in trouble for sending spam.  Does anyone know of a website with

You can't.  Period.  You will *always* get complaints about your mail
no matter what you do.  Not that this topic has anything to do with
SpamAssassin, either.


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Guidelines for Mass Mailings

[Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder]

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 19:15, Steve Evans wrote:
> I have a few users who want to know how to send mass mailings and not
> get in trouble for sending spam.

Simple:
 - don't do opt-out. Never.
 - Make sure the people receiving the mails really want this.
 - *confirm* all e-mail addresses
 - unsubscribe instructions in every messages. If it's freuqent
mailings, probably best at the bottom. If it's rare mailings, probably
best at the top, with a short sentence explaining why they receive the
msg.
 - set up your software correctly
One more:
 - as an organisation, you may be in the position to force others to
receive messages - and here I mean members of the organisation
(employees, students...), NOT customers. Don't use it too much. 

That's it, really. But as Vivek said: you *will* get complaints.

Additional requirements vary widely. Some prefer plain text messages,
others tolerate or acutally like html - or the content may demand html.

cheers
-- vbi

-- 
featured product: GNU Privacy Guard - http://gnupg.org



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[Vivek Khera]

> "MSS" == Malte S Stretz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>> of the "what if 50% of all those uses of free versions actually paid us
>> instead"-kind; and suddenly they're using their slightly changed license,
>> or bruteforce lawyerpower, to make it damn hard to use SA.

MSS> I trust Justin and Craig enough to be sure that they'd never agree to do 
MSS> something like this.

Well, only the copyright holder can change the licensing terms, and
not retro-activly remove the GPL/PAL.  Now, if they have documentation
for every contribution to SpamAssassin and everyone of those
contributers agrees to the change (or had assigned copyright to
someone who agrees) only then can they change the license for future
releases.  Otherwise they'll have to excise that contribution, and
without proper documentation of each source, that's impossible.

This is precisely why the FSF requires copyright assignment for any
alterations to projects they 'own' such as emacs and gcc -- there is
one and only one copyright holder who can make all the necessary
decisions for upholding the license.

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vivek Khera, Ph.D.Khera Communications, Inc.
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   Rockville, MD   +1-240-453-8497
AIM: vivekkhera Y!: vivek_khera   http://www.khera.org/~vivek/


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[Paul Reilly]

Does the aquisition of Deersoft by NAI mean that the key developers can
no longer contribute code to the open source project? Will they be
allowed to work on the open source code in work hours or will they just
work on the proprietary code? Does their employment at NAI restrict
them from coding in other GNU projects?

Paul



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)

[Jchen22]

Check this message (scroll down until you see   tag!)

Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mh1nj.bloomberg.com (mh1nj [160.43.164.207])
by bloomberg.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id h06Neu520184
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:40:57 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mh3pdmz3a.bloomberg.net by mh1nj.bloomberg.com with ESMTP for
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:40:52 -0500
Received: from 4f.tr.greatmails.com by mh3pdmz3a.bloomberg.net with ESMTP for
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:33:53 -0500
Received: by 4f.tr.greatmails.com (Postfix, from userid 1043)
id DCB577A915F; Tue,  7 Jan 2003 09:38:33 +1000 (EST)
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 09:38:33 +1000
From: Stella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Pictures of an Chix Broken Ass
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"




Do you want to see what an Ass looks like after 20 Men have had their way?
Go now to http://preview.brokenass.com/hp/466/";>http://www.brokenass.com
























If you want to stop receiving this newsletter, please forward
this email to our organization at mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>[EMAIL PROTECTED]

We in no way wish to send unwanted email to any individuals,
as the material may contravene laws in your State

Simple removal: http://globeshops.net/no.php?u=85481511";>http://globeshops.net/no.php?u=8548
1511
http://globeshops.net/db.php?m=466&e=85481511";>




---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] spamc and homedir

[Kai Schaetzl]

Rick Macdougall wrote on Tue, 7 Jan 2003 11:57:12 -0500:

> spamc has no such restriction.  All that needs to be done is increase the
> size of the field in the MySQL database.  We use it here with great success.
>

Thanks for both answers. So, this means, 1. MailCorral is the culprit handing 
over only the username part, and 2. it could also just hand over the domain 
part which would make managing this much easier. I check with the MailCorral 
developer, thanks! 


Kai

-- 

Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
IE-Center: http://ie5.de & http://msie.winware.org





---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)

[Steve Thomas]

They've been doing that one-pixel-graphic trick for quite some time. BTW, it
scored 3.4 on the 2.50 SA that I installed today. Still not high enough, but
getting better, especially for something with very little actual message
content.


| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 1:03 PM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)
|
|
| Check this message (scroll down until you see   tag!)
|
| Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Received: from mh1nj.bloomberg.com (mh1nj [160.43.164.207])
| by bloomberg.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id h06Neu520184
| for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 6 Jan 2003
| 18:40:57 -0500 (EST)
| Received: from mh3pdmz3a.bloomberg.net by mh1nj.bloomberg.com
| with ESMTP for
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:40:52 -0500
| Received: from 4f.tr.greatmails.com by mh3pdmz3a.bloomberg.net
| with ESMTP for
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:33:53 -0500
| Received: by 4f.tr.greatmails.com (Postfix, from userid 1043)
| id DCB577A915F; Tue,  7 Jan 2003 09:38:33 +1000 (EST)
| Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 09:38:33 +1000
| From: Stella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Pictures of an Chix Broken Ass
| Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| MIME-Version: 1.0
| Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
|
|
| 
|
| Do you want to see what an Ass looks like after 20 Men have had their way?
| Go now to http://preview.brokenass.com/hp/466/";>http://www.brokenass.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| If you want to stop receiving this newsletter, please forward
| this email to our organization at mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| We in no way wish to send unwanted email to any individuals,
| as the material may contravene laws in your State
|
| Simple removal: http://globeshops.net/no.php?u=85481511";>http://globeshops.n
| et/no.php?u=8548
| 1511
| http://globeshops.net/db.php?m=466&e=85481511";>
|
|
|
|
| ---
| This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
| SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
| http://www.vasoftware.com
| ___
| Spamassassin-talk mailing list
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
|



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[Tony L. Svanstrom]

On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 the voices made Malte S. Stretz write:

MSS> On Tuesday 07 January 2003 20:16 CET Tony L. Svanstrom wrote:
MSS> >[...]
MSS> >  What NetAss can do, via their employees running this project, is to
MSS> > change the license somewhat... which won't hurt anyone today, next week
MSS> > or even 3 months from now... but then someone at NetAss starts doing math
MSS> > of the "what if 50% of all those uses of free versions actually paid us
MSS> > instead"-kind; and suddenly they're using their slightly changed license,
MSS> > or bruteforce lawyerpower, to make it damn hard to use SA.
MSS>
MSS> I trust Justin and Craig enough to be sure that they'd never agree to do
MSS> something like this.

 All we know is that people can happily keep on working with SA as long as
nothing changes (like the license), and that at the first sign of trouble
people can just do a fork and "market" SA using a different name; maybe even
win a fight to be allowed to keep on using the name.

 If NetAss[*] tries anything I'm sure there are enough organizations out there
with enough money/lawyers to make them regret it.



[*] I will of course start calling them NAI if they ever plan on buying a
company from me. ;-)
-- 
  /\___/\  /\___/\
  \_@ @_/  \_@ @_/
 +--oOO-(_)-OOo--oOO-(_)-OOo--+
 | Per scientiam ad libertatem! // Through knowledge towards freedom! |
 +---ôôô---ôôôôôô---ôôô---+
 \O/   \O/  (c)1998-2003  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  \O/   \O/



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] FWIW: SpamAssassin Commercial Ver. (Outlook)

[Copeland, Mary R]

Title: Plain Paper Stationery



Hi all, 
I'm really new to this program 
and list having just purchased the commercial version from Deersoft in 
Mid-December.  Recently I wrote to the Deersoft customer service folks to 
ask HOW the program reports each users customized "blacklist" back to the 
developers so the overall spam filter database can stay current.  {ok, you 
can laugh now, but somehow I'd gotten the impression that SpamAssassin checked 
for updated rules on a regular basis as well as reported addresses/mail which I 
had added to my blacklist with the "Block Sender" and "Block Recipient" 
filters}  
 
Interestingly enough I got an 
answer to my question late last week.  First they tell me that this 
feedback/update function is not available in the commercial version.  Then 
they make a point of telling me that they "rely on the open source" community to 
keep the database updated.
 
The kicker was seeing the 
messages yesterday about Deersoft being acquired by NAI.  
My mind is 
still trying to make sense of this series of communications/events.  

 
Happy New Year 
everyone!
Mary
 

[SAtalk] FWIW: SpamAssassin Commercial Ver. (Outlook)

[Copeland, Mary R]

Title: FWIW:  SpamAssassin Commercial Ver. (Outlook)





Hi all, 
I'm really new to this program and list having just purchased the commercial version from Deersoft in Mid-December.  Recently I wrote to the Deersoft customer service folks to ask HOW the program reports each users customized "blacklist" back to the developers so the overall spam filter database can stay current.  {ok, you can laugh now, but somehow I'd gotten the impression that SpamAssassin checked for updated rules on a regular basis as well as reported addresses/mail which I had added to my blacklist with the "Block Sender" and "Block Recipient" filters}  

Interestingly enough I got an answer to my question late last week.  First they tell me that this feedback/update function is not available in the commercial version.  Then they make a point of telling me that they "rely on the open source" community to keep the database updated.

The kicker was seeing the messages yesterday about Deersoft being acquired by NAI.  My mind is still trying to make sense of this series of communications/events.  

Happy New Year everyone!
Mary

Re: [SPAM] [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)

[Kai Maillists]

But it scored quite nicely and blocked your message now, possibly because I adjusted 
WEB-BUGS a bit ... ;-) Today I got the only two false positives since I started trying 
out SA a week ago. Both with mails from this list containing spam. What's the easiest 
way to whitelist this mailing list? whitelist_from doesn't work because it doesn't 
work on the envelope-from. Making a rule for another header like Sender?

Kai

Re: [SPAM] [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)

[Kai Maillists]

But it scored quite nicely and blocked your message now, possibly because I adjusted 
WEB-BUGS a bit ... ;-) Today I got the only two false positives since I started trying 
out SA a week ago. Both with mails from this list containing spam. What's the easiest 
way to whitelist this mailing list? whitelist_from doesn't work because it doesn't 
work on the envelope-from. Making a rule for another header like Sender?

Kai

[SAtalk] NAI did not buy SpamAssassin!

[Barry Jaspan]

Everyone, please calm down!

The amount of confusion on this list is staggering.  One very important 
point that many people seem to be missing:

Network Associates did *not* buy SpamAssassin!

NAI bought Deersoft, Inc.  Deersoft develops and sells some products, and 
NAI now owns those.  Deersoft's products incorporate SpamAssassin, probably 
including some custom modifications to SpamAssassin.  But Deersoft did not 
own SpamAssassin, because it is open-source under the GPL or PAL.  So NAI 
doesn't own it, either.

This means that NAI has no ability to restrict anyone's use of the open 
SpamAssassin code-base in any way.  No cease-and-desist letters, no 
licensing fees, nothing.

Deersoft did own the trademark on the name "SpamAssassin" (presumably, 
Justin sold it to them at some point in the past).  Now, NAI owns that 
trademark.  This means that NAI can control how that trademark is used in 
certain commercial ways.  So, they might try to force the open-source 
project to stop using that name.  If they do, they may or may not succeed 
(for a variety of complicated legal reasons).  But they've already said 
they don't plan to use the name, and it doesn't make much business sense 
for them to use it anyway.  So I doubt they will care.  But in the very 
worst case, the project can simply rename itself.  And I really doubt the 
worst case will happen (or even can happen).

So, this buyout of Deersoft really changes very little.  Deersoft was 
already selling a commercial version of SpamAssassin.  Spamnix sells one 
too, and there are others as well.  So now NAI is (and they could have even 
without buying Deersoft, although maybe they didn't understand that).  Any 
company that is competing with NAI's spam blocking products was already 
competing with several other SA-based products.  Maybe NAI will be a more 
formidable competitor, or maybe not.  So what has really changed?

I congratulate Justin et al for their efforts and for their succe$$.  I 
hope they made a boatload of money in this deal.  They deserve it.

Barry



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Return Spam to Sender

[Martin Schroeder]

On 2003-01-07 13:51:49 -0500, Jerry Rasmussen wrote:
> user.  Does anyone have a suggestion on how best to accomplish this?

You could use procmail at the server.

Best regards
Martin

PS: _Please_ learn to quote.
-- 
 http://www.tm.oneiros.de/calendar/2003/


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SPAM] [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)

[Martin Radford]

At Tue Jan  7 22:38:13 2003, Bolero (Kai Maillists) wrote:

> But it scored quite nicely and blocked your message now, possibly
> because I adjusted WEB-BUGS a bit ... ;-) Today I got the only two
> false positives since I started trying out SA a week ago. Both with
> mails from this list containing spam. What's the easiest way to
> whitelist this mailing list? whitelist_from doesn't work because it
> doesn't work on the envelope-from. Making a rule for another header
> like Sender?

I use procmail, and tell it not to bother scanning mail with a subject
line including "SAtalk".  In fact, I do the same for all the lists I'm
on since they're pretty much spam-free (and also my system is a 486/66
with 32MB RAM and scanning mail is very hard work for it!).

Martin
-- 
Martin Radford  |   "Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | men just upload their important stuff  -o)
Registered Linux user #9257 |  on ftp and let the rest of the world  /\\
- see http://counter.li.org |   mirror it ;)"  - Linus Torvalds _\_V


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] How do I filter by subject?

[Graham Freeman]

Howdy folks,

--
DISCLAIMER
--

I searched relatively extensively through the documentation at
www.spamassassin.org, and I've conducted a few searches for "filter
subject" and the like on sourceforge's archive of the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] list, but so far I can't find an
answer to my question.

--
BACKGROUND
--

We have spamassassin 2.31 (via the current Red Hat Linux 8.0 RPM) deployed
on our e-mail server, and for the most part it works well.  However, one
of our company principals would like to add a filter such that any e-mail
with a specific string of text (such as "FOOBAR") is not flagged as spam,
regardless of any other spammish characteristics of the message.  
Apparently several of her regular legitimate correspondents use spammy
e-mail providers and MUAs, the most common factor is this particular
string of text in the subject.  Because she won't necessarily know who'll
respond to one of these important messages, she has no way to populate her
e-mail whitelist in advance.  In this situation and most others, it's far
more important to get the legitimate messages than it is to effectively
filter spam.


QUESTION


So, can I add a subject filter to her user_prefs file?  If so, how?

Would I be better off doing this with procmail?  For example, I suppose I
could work around this by adjusting her procmailrc such that it doesn't
pass any messages with this magic keyword to spamc, but I'd prefer to do
all content-based spam filtering with spamassassin alone.

In the meantime, I'm simply not filtering her spam-flagged messages off to
a separate folder like I normally would.

Thanks in advance for any assistance you can provide.

-- 
Graham Freeman
Manager of Information Technology
Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.
+1 530 756 3941 ext 111
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SPAM] [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)

[Steve Thomas]

all_spam_to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

I have *@lists.sourceforge.net instead as I'm on a number of lists there.


| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
| Bolero (Kai Maillists)
| Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 2:38 PM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Re: [SPAM] [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)
| 
| 
| But it scored quite nicely and blocked your message now, possibly 
| because I adjusted WEB-BUGS a bit ... ;-) Today I got the only 
| two false positives since I started trying out SA a week ago. 
| Both with mails from this list containing spam. What's the 
| easiest way to whitelist this mailing list? whitelist_from 
| doesn't work because it doesn't work on the envelope-from. Making 
| a rule for another header like Sender?
| 
| Kai
| 


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SPAM] [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)

[Copeland, Mary R]

Title: RE: [SPAM] [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)





I don't know much about the open source coding, but the commercial version had an option to "allow-recipient" ... maybe (following the example of your text below) something like whitelist_to ??? because lots of mailing lists have a specific list address to which all mail is sent (I know I have mail from the Army's automation professionals who run the "53list" which has [53L] in the subject line of every message ... then again, I don't know if SA looks at the subject line for specific words/characters ???)  

Mary



-Original Message-
From: Bolero [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 3:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SPAM] [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)



But it scored quite nicely and blocked your message now, possibly because I adjusted WEB-BUGS a bit ... ;-) Today I got the only two false positives since I started trying out SA a week ago. Both with mails from this list containing spam. What's the easiest way to whitelist this mailing list? whitelist_from doesn't work because it doesn't work on the envelope-from. Making a rule for another header like Sender?

Kai

[SAtalk] Re: [SAdev] Goodbye

[Duncan Findlay]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 11:21:07AM +, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Due to the recent aquisition of DeerSoft by NAI, a competitor of ours, I
> have to quit working on this project. I'll still watch the mailing
> lists, but I won't be able to make any contributions due to this
> conflict of interest. I feel really gutted about this, since I'm very
> committed to open source (as people who know my other Perl work know),
> but I've never had something conflict with my job in this way, and so I
> have to face reality - this company just isn't going to let me give code
> away to a competitor.

I see your position, and I'm quite disappointed at where the project
seems to be headed.
 
> So I say goodbye - so long and thanks for all the fish.

I hope you stay in touch with us! Even if you can't do any coding, we
still will value your opinion in the form of suggestions or even moral
support :-)

> SA3 is a little more complex, since it's code I was working on alone.
> But sadly since this buyout happened before I could merge the code back
> into the main SA branch (and before SA2.50, after which I was going to
> do the merge) someone is going to have to take up the bat for SA3, or
> see it languish and die (though it will probably live on in a
> proprietary form here at MessageLabs).

> Luckily the code in CVS is the latest - I didn't really get chance to
> work on it over the holidays. Plus the code works - the only things left
> to do are integrate it back into spamassassin and spamd scripts, and do
> lots of cleanup, and re-merge all the rule changes from SA2.x.

I really hope we see this; hopefully someone will step up to the
plate. I was looking forward to SA3.

-- 
Duncan Findlay


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[Jeff Morton]

Yes and no.  If there are patents involved, McAfee can excercise them to 
stop entirely the distribution of anything but their proprietary 
internal code.

Ross Vandegrift wrote:

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 10:36:57AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 

I see this acquisition as a sellout. Plain and simple. And this comes from a 
guy who has seen his fair share of business deals, and been approached 
to "sell out" as well. Why do I say this? Because Mcaffee does not embrace 
the open source model.
   


Whoa dude calm down there.  It's only a sellout if things go south.
There's no immediate reason to expect things to get worse for the
community.  SA is GPL dual-licensed - it *can't* really be sold out.  If
NAI takes it somewhere you don't like, give them the finger and fork it.
Free software is a wonderful thing.

Sheesh - at least give them a chance!

 





---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] NAI did not buy SpamAssassin!

[Robert J. Accettura]

Good points.  The only thing lost is some developers.  Though hopefully 
the SA community will work to make up.  I am currently learning Perl, 
and have been observing the project for weeks.  Hopefully soon I can 
start kicking in some code.  

That's the only loss.  

A name is just a name.  If the code was bad, nobody would care about SA. 
A good product goes by any name.

Barry Jaspan wrote:

Everyone, please calm down!

The amount of confusion on this list is staggering.  One very 
important point that many people seem to be missing:

Network Associates did *not* buy SpamAssassin!

NAI bought Deersoft, Inc.  Deersoft develops and sells some products, 
and NAI now owns those.  Deersoft's products incorporate SpamAssassin, 
probably including some custom modifications to SpamAssassin.  But 
Deersoft did not own SpamAssassin, because it is open-source under the 
GPL or PAL.  So NAI doesn't own it, either.

This means that NAI has no ability to restrict anyone's use of the 
open SpamAssassin code-base in any way.  No cease-and-desist letters, 
no licensing fees, nothing.

Deersoft did own the trademark on the name "SpamAssassin" (presumably, 
Justin sold it to them at some point in the past).  Now, NAI owns that 
trademark.  This means that NAI can control how that trademark is used 
in certain commercial ways.  So, they might try to force the 
open-source project to stop using that name.  If they do, they may or 
may not succeed (for a variety of complicated legal reasons).  But 
they've already said they don't plan to use the name, and it doesn't 
make much business sense for them to use it anyway.  So I doubt they 
will care.  But in the very worst case, the project can simply rename 
itself.  And I really doubt the worst case will happen (or even can 
happen).

So, this buyout of Deersoft really changes very little.  Deersoft was 
already selling a commercial version of SpamAssassin.  Spamnix sells 
one too, and there are others as well.  So now NAI is (and they could 
have even without buying Deersoft, although maybe they didn't 
understand that).  Any company that is competing with NAI's spam 
blocking products was already competing with several other SA-based 
products.  Maybe NAI will be a more formidable competitor, or maybe 
not.  So what has really changed?

I congratulate Justin et al for their efforts and for their succe$$.  
I hope they made a boatload of money in this deal.  They deserve it.

Barry



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk




--
Robert J. Accettura
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: [SAtalk] NAI did not buy SpamAssassin!

[Martin Radford]

At Tue Jan  7 22:56:43 2003, Barry Jaspan wrote:
> 
> Everyone, please calm down!
> 
> The amount of confusion on this list is staggering.  One very important 
> point that many people seem to be missing:
> 
> Network Associates did *not* buy SpamAssassin!
> 
> NAI bought Deersoft, Inc.  Deersoft develops and sells some products, and 
> NAI now owns those.  Deersoft's products incorporate SpamAssassin, probably 
> including some custom modifications to SpamAssassin.  But Deersoft did not 
> own SpamAssassin, because it is open-source under the GPL or PAL.  So NAI 
> doesn't own it, either.

It depends what you mean by "own".  Software is not tangible property,
so there's no physical property you can point at.  However, I suspect
NAI now hold the copyright on a substantial proportion of SpamAssassin.

Open-source != copyright-free.  Someone has to be in the position of
copyright holder in order to grant you a licence to use the software
(in this case the GNU GPL or Perl Artistic Licence).

(IANAL)

Martin
-- 
Martin Radford  |   "Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | men just upload their important stuff  -o)
Registered Linux user #9257 |  on ftp and let the rest of the world  /\\
- see http://counter.li.org |   mirror it ;)"  - Linus Torvalds _\_V


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] FWIW: SpamAssassin Commercial Ver. (Outlook)

[Evan Platt]

At 02:03 PM 01/07/2003, you wrote:

Hi all,
I'm really new to this program and list having just purchased the 
commercial version from Deersoft in Mid-December.  Recently I wrote to the 
Deersoft customer service folks to ask HOW the program reports each users 
customized "blacklist" back to the developers so the overall spam filter 
database can stay current.  {ok, you can laugh now, but somehow I'd gotten 
the impression that SpamAssassin checked for updated rules on a regular 
basis as well as reported addresses/mail which I had added to my blacklist 
with the "Block Sender" and "Block Recipient" filters}

Interestingly enough I got an answer to my question late last week.  First 
they tell me that this feedback/update function is not available in the 
commercial version.  Then they make a point of telling me that they "rely 
on the open source" community to keep the database updated.

The kicker was seeing the messages yesterday about Deersoft being acquired 
by NAI.  My mind is still trying to make sense of this series of 
communications/events.


Don't know if you'll be able to get much support here - this is for the 
Open Source version of Spam Assassin. One point of advice I CAN offer is to 
turn of HTML in your messages. I noticed you just resent your mail in 
non-HTML - and your spam score went from 3.2 to 0.7:

X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.2 required=5.0
tests=EXCHANGE_SERVER,HTML_20_30,HTML_FONT_BIG,HTML_FONT_BIG_B,
  HTML_FONT_COLOR_RED,HTML_FONT_COLOR_UNSAFE,
  HTML_FONT_FACE_ODD,HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_WITH_BGCOLOR,
  KNOWN_MAILING_LIST

X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0
tests=EXCHANGE_SERVER,HTML_10_20,HTML_MESSAGE,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST

But yes, they are correct - the reporting is only available on the Open 
Source version. I'm not sure where the 'humor' is in this or why this is 
hard to comprehend?

Evan



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] a very smart spammer. (score only 1.6)

[Jeremy Nixon]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 04:03:23PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Check this message (scroll down until you see   tag!)

The copy of this spam that I got scored 7.7 against my filters.

X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=7.7 required=5.0
tests=CTYPE_JUST_HTML,HTML_PRE,MAILTO_LINK,ONE_PIXEL_IMG,
  RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,SPAM_PHRASE_02_03,WEB_BUGS
version=2.43

I have WEB_BUGS cranked up to 1.15, bl.spamcop.net at 2.45, and two of
those rules are mine:

ONE_PIXEL_IMAGE scores 1.95 for HTML referencing a single-pixel image.
It depends on a couple of other meta rules, which may or may not work
in stock SA 2.43.  (The __A prefix is because I have mine sorting meta
rules alphabetically, and won't be necessary with 2.50.)

header __MULTIPARTContent-Type =~ /^multipart\/(?:alternative|related|mixed)/
# This is not exactly precise, but should be good enough.
rawbody __HTML_PART   /^Content-Type: text\/html/
meta  __A_HTML_MAIL   (__CTYPE_IS_HTML || (__MULTIPART && __HTML_PART))

rawbody __ONE_PIXEL_IMG  
/\]{1,90}(?:height|width)=\"?1\"?[^>]{1,20}(?:width|height)=\"?1\"?/ims
meta ONE_PIXEL_IMG   (__A_HTML_MAIL && __ONE_PIXEL_IMG)
score ONE_PIXEL_IMG  1.95
describe ONE_PIXEL_IMG   HTML references a single-pixel image

HTML_PRE matches the  the message starts off with, for
0.75 points.

rawbody __HTML_PRE /\\\/i
meta HTML_PRE  (__A_HTML_MAIL && __HTML_PRE)
score HTML_PRE 0.75
describe HTML_PRE  HTML body but preformatted text

Enjoy.

-Jeremy


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SAtalk] NAI did not buy SpamAssassin!

[Copeland, Mary R]

Title: RE: [SAtalk] NAI did not buy SpamAssassin!





Good point!


But I still have my question about how the addresses I've added to my "blacklist" can contribute to updating the spam filters database.    Is there a particular address to which I can send a copy? or does anybody know a way to configure SA to periodically send the recent additions to my blacklist to whoever maintains the SA database?

Mary



-Original Message-
From: Barry Jaspan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 3:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SAtalk] NAI did not buy SpamAssassin!



Everyone, please calm down!


The amount of confusion on this list is staggering.  One very important 
point that many people seem to be missing:


Network Associates did *not* buy SpamAssassin!


NAI bought Deersoft, Inc.  Deersoft develops and sells some products, and 
NAI now owns those.  Deersoft's products incorporate SpamAssassin, probably 
including some custom modifications to SpamAssassin.  But Deersoft did not 
own SpamAssassin, because it is open-source under the GPL or PAL.  So NAI 
doesn't own it, either.


This means that NAI has no ability to restrict anyone's use of the open 
SpamAssassin code-base in any way.  No cease-and-desist letters, no 
licensing fees, nothing.


Deersoft did own the trademark on the name "SpamAssassin" (presumably, 
Justin sold it to them at some point in the past).  Now, NAI owns that 
trademark.  This means that NAI can control how that trademark is used in 
certain commercial ways.  So, they might try to force the open-source 
project to stop using that name.  If they do, they may or may not succeed 
(for a variety of complicated legal reasons).  But they've already said 
they don't plan to use the name, and it doesn't make much business sense 
for them to use it anyway.  So I doubt they will care.  But in the very 
worst case, the project can simply rename itself.  And I really doubt the 
worst case will happen (or even can happen).


So, this buyout of Deersoft really changes very little.  Deersoft was 
already selling a commercial version of SpamAssassin.  Spamnix sells one 
too, and there are others as well.  So now NAI is (and they could have even 
without buying Deersoft, although maybe they didn't understand that).  Any 
company that is competing with NAI's spam blocking products was already 
competing with several other SA-based products.  Maybe NAI will be a more 
formidable competitor, or maybe not.  So what has really changed?


I congratulate Justin et al for their efforts and for their succe$$.  I 
hope they made a boatload of money in this deal.  They deserve it.


Barry




---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SAtalk] How do I filter by subject?

[Steve Thomas]

There's a couple of ways you could do this. You could write a rule that
assigned a negative score, such as:

header   SUBJECT_FOOBAR   Subject =~ /FOOBAR/
describe SUBJECT_FOOBAR   Subject contains FOOBAR
scoreSUBJECT_FOOBAR   -100.0

OR...

you add a condition to your procmail recipe:

:0fw
* < 256000
* !^Subject:.*FOOBAR
| /usr/bin/spamc


I'd opt for the second choice to reduce the overhead of unnecessarily
running the message through SA. It wouldn't hurt to also add the custom
rule, but in theory it shouldn't ever "hit".

HTH,
Steve



| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
| Graham Freeman
| Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 3:35 PM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: [SAtalk] How do I filter by subject?
|
|
|
| Howdy folks,
|
| --
| DISCLAIMER
| --
|
| I searched relatively extensively through the documentation at
| www.spamassassin.org, and I've conducted a few searches for "filter
| subject" and the like on sourceforge's archive of the
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, but so far I can't find an
| answer to my question.
|
| --
| BACKGROUND
| --
|
| We have spamassassin 2.31 (via the current Red Hat Linux 8.0 RPM) deployed
| on our e-mail server, and for the most part it works well.  However, one
| of our company principals would like to add a filter such that any e-mail
| with a specific string of text (such as "FOOBAR") is not flagged as spam,
| regardless of any other spammish characteristics of the message.
| Apparently several of her regular legitimate correspondents use spammy
| e-mail providers and MUAs, the most common factor is this particular
| string of text in the subject.  Because she won't necessarily know who'll
| respond to one of these important messages, she has no way to populate her
| e-mail whitelist in advance.  In this situation and most others, it's far
| more important to get the legitimate messages than it is to effectively
| filter spam.
|
| 
| QUESTION
| 
|
| So, can I add a subject filter to her user_prefs file?  If so, how?
|
| Would I be better off doing this with procmail?  For example, I suppose I
| could work around this by adjusting her procmailrc such that it doesn't
| pass any messages with this magic keyword to spamc, but I'd prefer to do
| all content-based spam filtering with spamassassin alone.
|
| In the meantime, I'm simply not filtering her spam-flagged messages off to
| a separate folder like I normally would.
|
| Thanks in advance for any assistance you can provide.
|
| --
| Graham Freeman
| Manager of Information Technology
| Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.
| +1 530 756 3941 ext 111
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
|
|
| ---
| This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
| SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
| http://www.vasoftware.com
| ___
| Spamassassin-talk mailing list
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
|



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Hispeedmedia: spam with images as content

[Scot Wilcoxon]

Well, give a small score for "wealth" and "millionaire"?

How about a score for table cells with nothing but images, with optional 
links?  The more they try to paint a picture the higher their score.
Let's see... maybe:
/<\/td>/
/<\/td>/

Also, inside the Javascript, does "window.open" get points yet?
Probably also window.open with "mail", "direct", "mkt", or "market" 
within parentheses should get points.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Hispeedmedia: spam with images as content

[Matthew Cline]

On Tuesday 07 January 2003 09:31 am, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> I'm new to SA and not using the devel version 2.50 but 2.43, so maybe
> this is already solved there?

[snip]

> HTML body which builds the message from images only.

The devel version has some improvements that will (hopefully) take care 
of this.  The code that determines what perecent of the message is HTML 
markup had a bug fixed, so it will now correctly determine that such a 
message is 100% markup.  And three new sets of rules have been added 
for image only messages:

* Contains images and has a low number of bytes in the text part of
  the message.
* A low ratio of text to image area.
* A large total number of pixels in the message.

We'll have to freeze the code and run the GA to see if the total score 
marks such messages as spam.

-- 
Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on
fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Advanced SPAM filtering software: http://spamassassin.org


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] 2 Questions: RBL and IP/domain blocking

[Jonathan Duncan]

1) How can I check to see if RBL checks are actually being made on my 
system?  I have the following in my local.cf

skip_rbl_checks 0
num_check_received 2
rbl_timeout 30


2) I have a file that is 1240 lines long of IP addresses and 
domain/machine names that I have been wanting to blacklist.  For example:

chi-mailer01.bigtimevalues.com
204.188.52.17
mail121.mailstamp.com
64.5.201.141
mailvv-tp4.valuevalet.com
64.237.101.132

To put all of these in my local.cf or procmailrc seems like an aweful 
lot of work.  Does anyone know how to tell procmail to open this file I 
have and check the received_from header in email for matches from the 
file?

---
On the NAI subject, SA Rocks and will live on despite NAI!!  SA is like 
the Moon, owned by everyone and no one.  However, like the Moon, the 
government has somehow put a spell on people making them think that we 
need to ask their permission before we go back there.  Don't let 
thoughts of NAI bully us!  They can't touch us.  Carry on!

Best regards,
-- 
Jonathan Duncan
nacnud.com administrator
Nacnud, Inc.





Brought to you by nacnudMail using TWIG.  http://www.nacnud.com



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] 2 Questions: RBL and IP/domain blocking

[Rick Macdougall]

Hi,

1)  Turn on debuging for awhile and watch the logs.  I personally don't use
RBL lookups in SpamAssassin but rather do it at the smtp level.

2)  Ever looked at rbldns by DJB ?  I use it here for rbl.axess.com and all
spam I get gets their IP address added to it (excluding actual ISP mail
servers).  I'm at 3200 IP's / Class C's and counting.

Regards,

Rick

- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 7:36 PM
Subject: [SAtalk] 2 Questions: RBL and IP/domain blocking


1) How can I check to see if RBL checks are actually being made on my
system?  I have the following in my local.cf

skip_rbl_checks 0
num_check_received 2
rbl_timeout 30


2) I have a file that is 1240 lines long of IP addresses and
domain/machine names that I have been wanting to blacklist.  For example:

chi-mailer01.bigtimevalues.com
204.188.52.17
mail121.mailstamp.com
64.5.201.141
mailvv-tp4.valuevalet.com
64.237.101.132

To put all of these in my local.cf or procmailrc seems like an aweful
lot of work.  Does anyone know how to tell procmail to open this file I
have and check the received_from header in email for matches from the
file?

---
On the NAI subject, SA Rocks and will live on despite NAI!!  SA is like
the Moon, owned by everyone and no one.  However, like the Moon, the
government has somehow put a spell on people making them think that we
need to ask their permission before we go back there.  Don't let
thoughts of NAI bully us!  They can't touch us.  Carry on!

Best regards,
--
Jonathan Duncan
nacnud.com administrator
Nacnud, Inc.





Brought to you by nacnudMail using TWIG.  http://www.nacnud.com



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Guidelines for Mass Mailings

[Matthew Davis]

On the unsubscribe subject, IMO, having the List-(Un)Subscribe/Help/Id: headers will 
make it look less like spam.

Speaking of which, is this a spam check?

* Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 19:15, Steve Evans wrote:
> > I have a few users who want to know how to send mass mailings and not
> > get in trouble for sending spam.
> 
> Simple:
>  - don't do opt-out. Never.
>  - Make sure the people receiving the mails really want this.
>  - *confirm* all e-mail addresses
>  - unsubscribe instructions in every messages. If it's freuqent
> mailings, probably best at the bottom. If it's rare mailings, probably
> best at the top, with a short sentence explaining why they receive the
> msg.
>  - set up your software correctly
> One more:
>  - as an organisation, you may be in the position to force others to
> receive messages - and here I mean members of the organisation
> (employees, students...), NOT customers. Don't use it too much. 
> 
> That's it, really. But as Vivek said: you *will* get complaints.
> 
> Additional requirements vary widely. Some prefer plain text messages,
> others tolerate or acutally like html - or the content may demand html.
> 
> cheers
> -- vbi
> 
> -- 
> featured product: GNU Privacy Guard - http://gnupg.org




--
| Matthew Davis /\ http://dogpound.vnet.net/ |
||
| Tuesday, January 07, 2003 / 07:56PM  |
--
When I play in the sandbox, the cat covers me up!


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] 2 Questions: RBL and IP/domain blocking

[Tomki]

Jonathan,
I don't know the answer to #1, but for #2 you should go here:
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/info/proctips.html for the answer, and more great 
education on procmail.

--Tomki

At 12:36 AM 1/8/2003 +, you wrote:
1) How can I check to see if RBL checks are actually being made on my
system?  I have the following in my local.cf

skip_rbl_checks 0
num_check_received 2
rbl_timeout 30


2) I have a file that is 1240 lines long of IP addresses and
domain/machine names that I have been wanting to blacklist.  For example:

chi-mailer01.bigtimevalues.com
204.188.52.17
mail121.mailstamp.com
64.5.201.141
mailvv-tp4.valuevalet.com
64.237.101.132

To put all of these in my local.cf or procmailrc seems like an aweful
lot of work.  Does anyone know how to tell procmail to open this file I
have and check the received_from header in email for matches from the
file?

---
On the NAI subject, SA Rocks and will live on despite NAI!!  SA is like
the Moon, owned by everyone and no one.  However, like the Moon, the
government has somehow put a spell on people making them think that we
need to ask their permission before we go back there.  Don't let
thoughts of NAI bully us!  They can't touch us.  Carry on!

Best regards,
--
Jonathan Duncan
nacnud.com administrator
Nacnud, Inc.





Brought to you by nacnudMail using TWIG.  http://www.nacnud.com



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk




---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SAtalk] How do I filter by subject?

[Graham Freeman]

On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, Steve Thomas wrote:

> There's a couple of ways you could do this. You could write a rule that
> assigned a negative score, such as:
> 
> header   SUBJECT_FOOBAR   Subject =~ /FOOBAR/
> describe SUBJECT_FOOBAR   Subject contains FOOBAR
> scoreSUBJECT_FOOBAR   -100.0
> 
> OR...
> 
> you add a condition to your procmail recipe:
> 
> :0fw
> * < 256000
> * !^Subject:.*FOOBAR
> | /usr/bin/spamc


Thanks!  The negative rule works well.  I now have a much better
understanding of how to write and implement such rules.

One thing that hung me up was the fact that
/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf (the global local preference file on Red
Hat 8.0) is only read upon initial startup of the SpamAssassin daemon,
whereas ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs (the per-user local config file) is
read on each iteration of spamc.

To help me remember this in the future, I added the following commented
text to my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf file:

[...begin quote...]
# This file is ONLY read on initial startup of SpamAssassin!
# On Red Hat 8.0, try '/sbin/service spamassassin restart' in order to
# re-start SA and re-read this file.
[...end quote...]


> I'd opt for the second choice to reduce the overhead of unnecessarily
> running the message through SA. It wouldn't hurt to also add the custom
> rule, but in theory it shouldn't ever "hit".
> 
> HTH,
> Steve


I don't mind the performance hit, as we have only ~40 users.  Our priority
is doing each task well, and your sample negative rule fits the bill.

Thanks again.

-- 
Graham Freeman
Manager of Information Technology
Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.
+1 530 756 3941 ext 111
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] 2 Questions: RBL and IP/domain blocking

[Mike Saunders]

On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Jonathan Duncan wrote:

> 1) How can I check to see if RBL checks are actually being made on my
> system?  I have the following in my local.cf
>
> skip_rbl_checks 0
> num_check_received 2
> rbl_timeout 30
>


spamassassin -D < test.msg > logfile 2>&1

That syntax probably only works in bash sh shells.  The test.msg is a test
spam that you've captured.  This will put spamassassin in debug mode and
there will be a lot of output.  I believe you'll see RBL results in there.


-Mike Saunders
method at method dot cx





---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] NAI did not buy SpamAssassin!

[Tony L. Svanstrom]

On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 the voices made Copeland, Mary R write:

CMR> But I still have my question about how the addresses I've added to my
CMR> "blacklist" can contribute to updating the spam filters database.  

 They can't; SA doesn't focus on blacklisted addresses, instead it works by
looking at other things... like if the body of the e-mail contains a certain
phrase or not.


-- 
  /\___/\  /\___/\
  \_@ @_/  \_@ @_/
 +--oOO-(_)-OOo--oOO-(_)-OOo--+
 | Per scientiam ad libertatem! // Through knowledge towards freedom! |
 +---ôôô---ôôôôôô---ôôô---+
 \O/   \O/  (c)1998-2003  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  \O/   \O/



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] web interface for regular users configuration

[Jeremy C. Reed]

Is there any web-based interface that users can use for configuring their
own Spam Assassin rules?

If not, is anyone interested in helping work on one?

(I saw some old postings from Charlie Watts and Michael Geier indicating
that they both have web interfaces.)

   Jeremy C. Reed

   http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/





---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] web interface for regular users configuration

[Rick Macdougall]

Hi,

Yes there is.  It exists for MySQL based users, squirrelmail regular users
and squirrelmail MySQL users.  Check the archives for complete information.

If you have a specific need and you can't find it, email me off list and
I'll point you in the right direction.

Regards,

Rick

- Original Message -
From: "Jeremy C. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 9:00 PM
Subject: [SAtalk] web interface for regular users configuration


Is there any web-based interface that users can use for configuring their
own Spam Assassin rules?

If not, is anyone interested in helping work on one?

(I saw some old postings from Charlie Watts and Michael Geier indicating
that they both have web interfaces.)

   Jeremy C. Reed

   http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/





---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] web interface for regular users configuration

[Victor Brilon]

I took the interface that someone (sorry don't remember who right now) 
posted and modified it. The original was written in PHP and I rewrote it 
in Perl, since I am allergic to PHP :), and added a bunch of 
functionality to it.

The text of the script is here: http://www.victorland.com/rules.txt

If whoever wrote the original would let me know, I'll add your name to 
the credits.

I am planning on rewriting this thing properly, instead of the 1 hour 
hack it is right now :) When I do so, I'll post it to this list.

Victor

Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
Is there any web-based interface that users can use for configuring their
own Spam Assassin rules?

If not, is anyone interested in helping work on one?

(I saw some old postings from Charlie Watts and Michael Geier indicating
that they both have web interfaces.)

   Jeremy C. Reed

   http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/





---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk





---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] No "tests=" in the X-Spam-Status line

[Ernesto Baschny]

Hi!

I have a problem with the headers generated.

I am running spamd (-d -r /var/run/spamd.pid -D -A x.x.x.x -i 0.0.0.0 -u
mail -x) from spamassassin 2.43 on a different host than the mailserver
(which doesn't have the "power").

Mailserver is a SuSE 8.0. Mails are being received by sendmail (8.12.3),
handed over to spamd via "spamassassin-milter" (SpamAssassin Milter
version 0.5.3 by Peter 'Luna' Runestig) and then stored on local
accounts via procmail (3.15.1). 

Here's whats being output on spam-emails:

X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=13.2 required=5.0
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.43 (1.115.2.20-2002-10-15-exp)
X-Spam-Report:  Start SpamAssassin results ---
---
This mail is probably spam.  The original message has been altered
   [...]

And on non-spam-emails:

X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0
X-Spam-Level: *

What I miss now is just the "tests=" part in the X-Spam-Status:

X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0
tests=CARRIAGE_RETURNS,CRON_ENV,FROM_AND_TO_SAME_5,
  SPAM_PHRASE_00_01
version=2.43
X-Spam-Level: *

Who might be the devil that strips this lines from my emails? I already
disabled all procmail rules and still no "tests=" section.  This way I
have no clue what tests have scored on non-spam mails.

If I pass the exact same email to spamd via "spamc" it returns a correct
formatted "tests=" line.

Procmail?  Sendmail?  Or this spamassassin-milter?


Thanks a lot for any help or suggestion of how I can find that out!

Ernesto

-- 
Ernesto Baschny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 http://www.baschny.de - PGP: http://www.baschny.de/pgp.txt
 Sao Paulo/Brasil - Stuttgart/Germany
 Ernst@IRCnet - ICQ# 2955403



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] sa install problem

[Postmaster]

I've attempted to install SA to work in conjunction with my smoothly running 
FreeBSD 4.7 qmail box, but I initially neglected to install the Pod::Usage 
perl module. When I ran a test using spamassassin it failed and gave me an 
error complaining about this. I installed the module (Pod::Usage) and 
recompiled spamassassin. Unfortunately, now whenever I run spamassassin or 
spamd, the computer hangs. Nothing happens... Kind of weird. Has anybody 
seen any similar behavior? Any ideas for me to try? I tried to make clean 
and then install using CPAN, but that didn’t work either. 

Thanks in advance!
jeremy 


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] Are you having problems with spamc/spamd or spamassassin on FreeBSD?

[Jeff Palmer]

Hello,

 

I’ve emailed the list several times in the last couple
of weeks,  trying
to resolve a problem I had.

 

After MANY hours of reconfiguring my server,  and pulling my hair
out,  I’ve figured out what the
problem is.  I’ve also reported it
to bugzilla.

 

However,    I had an
administrator email me off-list about having the same problem.

 

If you email me again,  I can tell you what changed.

 

All I remember,  is you were using FreeBSD,  and IIRC perl
v5.8.0

 

 

Jeff Palmer

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

[SAtalk] re: Hispeedmedia: spam with images as content

[Rolan Yang]

There's an easy solution to the hispeedmedia problem:

add these to your local rules

header HISPEEDMEDIA   Reply-To =~ /hispeedmedia.com/
describe HISPEEDMEDIA Bulk email reply to found in headers
score HISPEEDMEDIA  5



Kai Schaetzl wrote:

Lately, we are getting a LOT of spam from a vendor which seems to
 call itself HiSpeedMedia or HSM. They use several custom "list"
 domains (f.i. hsm2282jende119283000send.com,
 4list-11873649hsm987.com, list11873649hsm987.com,
 hsmdatabaseclump182643, hsmlistcluster182643library.com) specifically
 registered just for spamming and "one-day use" and include an invalid
 HTML body which builds the message from images only. They seem to
 spam only email addresses they harvested from whois, I'm not getting
 this on other email accounts. Since there's not much text in them SA
 has only the header for some scoring and only achieves between 1 and
 3.5, mostly around or less than 2. SA isn't able to detect even one
 of them as spam (using the default limit of 5) and, more or less,
 these count for most of the misses SA has on the spam.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] PDF files attached are flagged as Spam

[Pat Patton]

Any email that comes in with a PDF file attached is flagged as Spam. The
message header shows X=Spam-Status: Yes hits=0 required=0. I have the
required set to the default of 5. System is Redhat 7.2,  Spamassassin
2.43-2, Qmail 1.03. I am not seeing this problem with any other type
attachments.



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

[SAtalk] Rewriting Subjects with report_safe 0 not possible in 2.5?!

[Stefan Seiz]

Hi,

using 2.5CVS from Dec. 29, 2002 i realized the new behaviour of
"report_safe" attaching the original mail to the report.

In order to have 2.5 handle messages similar to how my 2.4 installation
handeled them, i set report_safe to 0.

Here are the relevant local.conf settings:
required_hits 6
report_header 1
rewrite_subject   1
subject_tag   [Possible SPAM]
use_terse_report  1
defang_mime   0
report_safe   0
skip_rbl_checks   1


Now since i did set report-safe to 0, SUBJECTS of tagged messages are no
longer prefixed with "[Possible SPAM]".
Is this done on purpose?

How can i get back the behaviour of 2.43 which prefixed the subjects, put
the report in the header without attaching the original mail?

Thanks and happy new year all!

--
Stefan Seiz 
Spamto: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder]

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 17:59, Chris Santerre wrote:
> "My leaving the project is just a drop in the ocean."
> That will send out ripples! 
> 
> I think Your situation will be discussed more then you think. The idea of
> this happening has a major impact on open source. What if NAI suddenly hired
> Dan Quinlan, Justin and Theo? Then we go from major contributors to NAI
> taking a lot of the power behind an open project. 
> 
> He who controls the purse strings kind of thing!

Spamfighting is not a small marked. I guess any developer who wants to
work on an opensource project in this area can find someone willing to
pay him - especially if he is/was a major contributor to a big,
well-known project.

I'm *not* accusing the developers who are leaving - there's loads I
don't know about anything here.

cheers
-- vbi

-- 
this email is protected by a digital signature: http://fortytwo.ch/gpg



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [SAtalk] Return Spam to Sender

[Jerry Rasmussen]

So I should have been more specific, this is a site wide install of
SpamAssassin using postfix.  It is a front-end mail server that parses the
email and then sends to the recipient on our Exchange server.  We would like
to prevent email marked as spam by spamassassin from getting to the end
user.  Does anyone have a suggestion on how best to accomplish this?
- Original Message -
From: "Brian May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jerry Rasmussen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Spam Assassin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Return Spam to Sender


> Let me be on of many to say, that it's a bad idea.  Most spam addresses
are
> fake, and at best, you send it to an email address that is valid, but
didn't
> send the spam.  And you create more useless net traffic.  It's best to
> report it to Razor, SpamCop and the like.. or use the trusty Del key...
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jerry Rasmussen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Spam Assassin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 12:46 PM
> Subject: [SAtalk] Return Spam to Sender
>
>
> How do you configure SpamAssassin to return spam to the sender?
>
>
>
> ---
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> ___
> Spamassassin-talk mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
>
>
>
> ---
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> ___
> Spamassassin-talk mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[Tony L. Svanstrom]

On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 the voices made Theo Van Dinter write:

TVD> On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 05:23:44PM +0100, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
TVD> > continues. Nobody can buy an open source project and make it closed source
TVD> > without _all_ it's contributors agreeing on a license change. I for my own
TVD> > won't.
TVD>
TVD> And the license change only effects new code.  You can't relicense already
TVD> published code.  I'm not going to be closing off my code either, so ...

 What NetAss can do, via their employees running this project, is to change the
license somewhat... which won't hurt anyone today, next week or even 3 months
from now... but then someone at NetAss starts doing math of the "what if 50% of
all those uses of free versions actually paid us instead"-kind; and suddenly
they're using their slightly changed license, or bruteforce lawyerpower, to
make it damn hard to use SA.
 Might not be enough to force the hardcore open source-community away, but
enough so that you can't use SA in any situation where you're afraid of being
sued (like a corporation).

 Maybe this is just paranoid rantings, but after what they did to PGP... who
knows...


-- 
  /\___/\  /\___/\
  \_@ @_/  \_@ @_/
 +--oOO-(_)-OOo--oOO-(_)-OOo--+
 | Per scientiam ad libertatem! // Through knowledge towards freedom! |
 +---ôôô---ôôôôôô---ôôô---+
 \O/   \O/  (c)1998-2003  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  \O/   \O/



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[Jeremy Nixon]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 12:06:13PM -0500, Rose, Bobby wrote:

> I wish we could get more info from Justin or Craig to clear up
> everything.  Justin's last message did raise some concern with the
> remark of "There's no closing of the source involved (except for their
> own (Deersoft now NAI) proprietary modifications according to the terms
> of the Artistic license)."  What code that is in SA does this include?

That wouldn't include any code in SA.  That's referring to changes they
have made to SA but which they have not released back to the open source
project.  The existing open source Spamassassin remains available no matter
what (the name itself is open to question, I guess).

-Jeremy


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

[Brian May]

One could argue that the whole point of open source it to use the community
to build and test your app.. then sell the product.  Deersoft did it..
Cloudmark did it... the only difference, Deersoft sold the company.

I understand that the developers need to eat and what not...  but I feel
like I was just f'ed and didn't get a reach around..

Granted.. I did no development what so ever, just used this fine app.  I
will continue to do so until NAI pulls a PGP on SA.

I just don't have a good feeling about this...  I wish it the best... but I
seem to have lost my happy thought.


- Original Message -
From: "Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "SATalk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 9:22 AM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)


- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "SATalk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft acquisition (thumbs down)

> I apologize for my rant being so long, and if I am wrong in my
> assessments (and I hope I am for the sake of this project), please let me
> know. I have watched SA grow, and I would like to see the tradition
> continue.

I agree with everything you said in your rant. :) SA could have become a
great, world-wide effort to stop spam; then someone dangles a few green
carrots in front of someone's eyes, and wham, we're collectively screwed
again. :(

If you invite people, as a collective effort, to better the product together
with you, having them believe they are working on a community project, then
you should afford them, if not a legal, then certainly the moral courtesy to
inform them that you plan to cash in on the project, subsequently, have the
decency to consult them on it. That leaves them the choice to divert their
time and energy to true Open Source projects.

- Mark



---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

RE: [SAtalk] Goodbye

[mailinglists]

Hi

I dont believe in goodbye spamassassin. Nai also aquired TIS FWTK and it's
still available under GNU Licence.

regrads,
philipp


---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Re: [SAtalk] Guidelines for Mass Mailings

[Maxime Ritter]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 10:15:18AM -0800, Steve Evans wrote:
> I have a few users who want to know how to send mass mailings and not
> get in trouble for sending spam.  Does anyone know of a website with
> guidelines that talk about opt-in/opt-out, how to know who you can send
> mass mailings to, what kind of wording to use for the opt-out, etc.

Go see (at least) these sites :
http://spam.abuse.net/spam/
http://www.boldfish.com/BF_emguide/Notes/opt-in.html
http://www.habeas.com/

-- 
   Maxime Ritter|French Computer Geek
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Jabber : [EMAIL PROTECTED]



msg12010/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature