[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 29.06.24 14:09, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: Oh. I thought I would see them like I see these 10025 entries: Jun 29 00:00:02 cjbnew postfix/smtp[15813]: < 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10025: 220 filter.mynetwork.local ESMTP including the port number. I added your suggestion and I see the

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

Oh. I thought I would see them like I see these 10025 entries: Jun 29 00:00:02 cjbnew postfix/smtp[15813]: < 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10025: 220 filter.mynetwork.local ESMTP including the port number. I added your suggestion and I see the traffic now for spampd but 10026 is not mentioned in those

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 29.06.24 10:28, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: I meant to mention I do not see any connections/traffic on port 10026 in the mail logs. see how? You haven't overridden the syslog_name in smtpd options on port 10026. The logs in your original mail: Jun 27 00:00:01 cjbnew*mydomain po

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

I meant to mention I do not see any connections/traffic on port 10026 in the mail logs. -Curt On 6/29/24 10:21, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: On 6/29/24 04:01, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users wrote: On 29.06.24 01:41, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: No I am not co

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 6/29/24 09:38, Bill Cole via Postfix-users wrote: On 2024-06-28 at 23:45:33 UTC-0400 (Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:45:33 -0500) Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users is rumored to have said: OK I tired this. What "mydestination" is set to does not matter whether it's localhost or 127.0.0.1 if spampd i

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 6/29/24 08:40, Ralph Seichter via Postfix-users wrote: * Curtis J. Blank via Postfix-users: Everything except this that is: mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, $mydomain, www.$mydomain Should this be set to: mydestination = $myhostname, 127.0.0.1.$mydomain, $mydomain, www.$

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 6/29/24 04:01, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users wrote: On 29.06.24 01:41, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: No I am not confusing inbound and outbound not you, someone other perhaps :-) and for this I'm only concerned about inbound and actually only on ports 10024-26 that

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 2024-06-28 at 23:45:33 UTC-0400 (Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:45:33 -0500) Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users is rumored to have said: OK I tired this. What "mydestination" is set to does not matter whether it's localhost or 127.0.0.1 if spampd is set to use localhost and not 127.0.0.1 it will not wor

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

* Curtis J. Blank via Postfix-users: > Everything except this that is: > mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, $mydomain, www.$mydomain > > Should this be set to: > mydestination = $myhostname, 127.0.0.1.$mydomain, $mydomain, www.$mydomain > > To keep ::1 from being used? No, that is

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 29.06.24 01:41, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: No I am not confusing inbound and outbound not you, someone other perhaps :-) and for this I'm only concerned about inbound and actually only on ports 10024-26 that are for lack of a better way to put it a customization. :10026   

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

No I am not confusing inbound and outbound and for this I'm only concerned about inbound and actually only on ports 10024-26 that are for lack of a better way to put it a customization. -Curt postconf -Mf smtp   inet  n   -   n   -   -   smtpd submission inet  n   -

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 29/06/24 18:09, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: I don't know how  many times now I have said this but I will day it again. I have postfix set up to only listen on/use  127.0.0.1 *not* ::1. What postfix listens on is irrelevant, this has to do with which IP postfix connects to spamp

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

I don't know how  many times now I have said this but I will day it again. I have postfix set up to only listen on/use  127.0.0.1 *not* ::1. And. I am not using spamd, it listens on port 783. I am using spampd which shows up as perl because is it written in perl and it listens on 10025. Here

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 29/06/24 15:16, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: Peter, my  misunderstanding, sorry. This is what I discovered today in my testing. I explicitly used 127.0.0.1 and not localhost or so I thought, I explain that below. Back on topic. I did some more testing. This was the spampd options

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

said the problem was with mynetworks, and neither did Ralph. Someone else said that and it's incorrect.  The problem is with whatever setting you have pointing to localhost:10025 as per your initial email: "The problem was handing messages off to localhost:10025 for spamassassin to sc

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

Yeah I thought of including the config but that OP was long due to all the logging so I didn't want to make it longer. I did say in my OP I would provide anything if requested. -Curt On 6/28/24 21:11, Peter via Postfix-users wrote: On 29/06/24 05:59, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: Al

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

g to localhost:10025 as per your initial email: "The problem was handing messages off to localhost:10025 for spamassassin to scan before delivery" ...this is likely your content_filter setting but could be done in other settings instead. Also, smtp_address_preference is not set to

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 29/06/24 05:59, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: Always in a good mood. It's a waste not to be. When I'm focused on something I just state the facts as I understand them and sometimes that doesn't come across well. Yeah I know localhost can be either that's why I used 127.0.0.1 in th

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

10025 as per your initial email: "The problem was handing messages off to localhost:10025 for spamassassin to scan before delivery" ...this is likely your content_filter setting but could be done in other settings instead. Also, smtp_address_preference is not set to anything on the

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

the mystery. The configs are exactly the same yet they operate differently. Like I wrote, localhost is not the same as 127.0.0.1 or ::1. It is just a name that your server needs to resolve into an IP address, which is a possible source of two servers behaving differently. If you explicitly use IP addre

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

having differently. If you explicitly use IP addresses instead of localhost in your configuration (Postfix, SpamAssassin, etc., both for binding and connecting), as I suggested, you can avoid DNS related problems. This technique was old 20 years ago, but it still works today. -Ralph _

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

needs to resolve into an IP address, which is a possible source of two servers behaving differently. If you explicitly use IP addresses instead of localhost in your configuration (Postfix, SpamAssassin, etc., both for binding and connecting), as I suggested, you can avoid DNS related problems. This te

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

and I expected there to be changes. So no I did not validate that spamassassin was using 127.0.01 *and* ::1 because I was not expecting it too. Like I said the new server is configured as a carbon copy of the old server and the old server does not use ::1. When I say carbon copy I diff -

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

used for the SMTP proxy form of filtering using Amavis. Since SpamAssassin has no SMTP proxy function and his logs show both sides of a SMTP chat between 2 smtpd processes, I think Amavis is the most likely thing listening. -- Bill Cole b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org (AKA @grumpybozo

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

ly resolve the issue: * Set compatibility_level to 2 or higher (do note that this will affect other settings as well). * Explicitly set smtp_address_preference to ipv4. Another thing of note, judging from your log entries SpamAssassin is listening on both 127.0.0.1 and ::1 but for some reason is re

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

Dnia 28.06.2024 o godz. 00:16:31 Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users pisze: > When "inet_protocols = all" the connection to filter.mynetwork.local > localhost > port 10025 to hand off the message to spamassassin for scanning fails with > "Relay access denied". Wh

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

On 28.06.24 02:01, Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users wrote: What I am looking for is pretty simple. How to get it to work with "inet_protocols = all" like my existing server is currently set up to do and not be limited to ipv4 only. simply allow receiving messages from ::1 on port 10025. 10025

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

enough is not good enough... Did you already validate (netstat -tnl) that spamassassin listens on both addresses, 127.0.0.1 and ::1? Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net alexan...@leidinger.net: PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF http://www.FreeBSD.orgnetch...@freebsd.org : PGP 0x8

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

What I am looking for is pretty simple. How to get it to work with "inet_protocols = all" like my existing server is currently set up to do and not be limited to ipv4 only. And it is already set to use 127.0.0.1 so why it is using [::1] instead when the old server uses 127.0.01, that is part o

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

* Curtis J. Blank via Postfix-users: > I would like to get some insight as to the cause and correct > configuration to use. [...] Maybe it is simply too early in the morning for me to get your point, but what insight are you looking for, exactly? You already found out that localhost does not ne

[pfx] Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

maybe even back to 2011. I basically set up this new server exactly how the old one is set up. So this is not a newbie asking for help. The fix I finally figured out boggles my mind. The problem was handing messages off to localhost:10025 for spamassassin to scan before delivery, every

[pfx] Re: [postfix] 3.4.23: SpamAssassin - Re-submission with sendmail - Append"receive_override_options = no_address_mappings"?

sendmail command. Content filter re-injection with /usr/sbin/sendmail has limitations that do not exist when - SpamAssassin is called through SMTP+Amavis (avoids /usr/sbin/sendmail, instead it uses dedicated SMTP server ports), - SpamAssassin is called through the Milter API (no re-injection

[pfx] [postfix] 3.4.23: SpamAssassin - Re-submission with sendmail - Append"receive_override_options = no_address_mappings"?

Hi, We've a SpamAssassin setup with the after-queue approach. When re-submission a mail, that has been content filtered by SpamAssassin, with sendmail we see that the mail is delivered twice to the recipient, if the user has a forwarding email set. From our understanding that is a resu

[pfx] Re: Can postfix/spamassassin save blocked messages ?

and/or spamassassin to save the blocked messages for debugging/troubleshooting purpuses ? How messages are handled is out of scope for SpamAssassin. It ONLY a classifier. Conditional handling may be implemented in whatever 'glue' layer you are using between the MTA and SA. For

[pfx] Can postfix/spamassassin save blocked messages ?

We have mail coming from one of our servers that gets a spam score of 8 and gets blocked. Is it possible to tweak the configuration of postfix and/or spamassassin to save the blocked messages for debugging/troubleshooting purpuses ? Thanks

[pfx] Re: Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

Am Montag, dem 10.07.2023 um 09:39 -0400 schrieb Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users: > On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 03:24:54PM +0200, Robert Senger wrote: > > > Hey, that was me! My full given name *is* Robert'); DROP ... > > > > CONFDIR=/etc/postfix > > POSTMAP=/usr/sbin/postmap > > LOCAL_VIRTUAL_USER

[pfx] Re: Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 03:24:54PM +0200, Robert Senger wrote: > Hey, that was me! My full given name *is* Robert'); DROP ... > > CONFDIR=/etc/postfix > POSTMAP=/usr/sbin/postmap > LOCAL_VIRTUAL_USERS=mysql:${CONFDIR}/virtual_mailboxes.mysql.cf > > recipient=$(printf '%s' "$2" | sed 's/[<>]//g')

[pfx] Re: Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

Am Montag, dem 10.07.2023 um 08:52 -0400 schrieb Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users: > > On 10 Jul 2023, at 5:50 am, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix- > > users wrote: > > > > > > #!/bin/bash > > > > user=`echo "$2" | sed 's/[<>]//g'` > > > > ret=`echo "select destination from virtual_aliases wh

[pfx] Re: Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

> On 10 Jul 2023, at 5:50 am, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users > wrote: > >>> #!/bin/bash >>> user=`echo "$2" | sed 's/[<>]//g'` >>> ret=`echo "select destination from virtual_aliases where >>> source=\"$user\";" | /usr/bin/mysql -upostfix -psecretpassword >>> mailserver | tail -n 1` >>>

[pfx] Re: Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

onnerstag, dem 29.06.2023 um 17:21 +0200 schrieb Robert Senger via Postfix-users: I am running Postfix 3.4.23 on Debian 10.13 Buster, with SpamAssassin 4.0.0 and spamass-milter 0.4.0-2 for spam detection. This is my "sendmail -bv" substitute: #!/bin/bash user=`echo "$2" | sed &#x

[pfx] Re: Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

t; Hi all! > > I am running Postfix 3.4.23 on Debian 10.13 Buster, with SpamAssassin > 4.0.0 and spamass-milter 0.4.0-2 for spam detection. > > Until now, SpamAssassin was configured to use system wide bayes > database for the bayesian classifier, which is trained by both sa's &g

[pfx] Re: Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 05:21:32PM +0200, Robert Senger via Postfix-users wrote: Of course, I could write my own "sendmail" script which takes the virtual_alias, I was thinking about the same, just utilising postconf and postmap... On 29.06.23 12:02, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote: T

[pfx] Re: Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

Robert Senger via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-06-29 17:21: ... The point is that spamassassin needs to know the username when processing an email, to update the correct bayes database. The username given to spamassassin by spamass-milter is the email address of the recipient. This is fine, as

[pfx] Re: Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

Robert Senger via Postfix-users: > Hi all! > > I am running Postfix 3.4.23 on Debian 10.13 Buster, with SpamAssassin > 4.0.0 and spamass-milter 0.4.0-2 for spam detection. > > Until now, SpamAssassin was configured to use system wide bayes > database for the bayesian classif

[pfx] Re: Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 05:21:32PM +0200, Robert Senger via Postfix-users wrote: > Of course, I could write my own "sendmail" script which takes the > virtual_alias, This is possible with care, but not ideal, better would be to find some way to get the milter to make the relevant queries directly

[pfx] Postfix "sendmail -bv" command: Trouble with spamassassin and virtual_aliases

Hi all! I am running Postfix 3.4.23 on Debian 10.13 Buster, with SpamAssassin 4.0.0 and spamass-milter 0.4.0-2 for spam detection. Until now, SpamAssassin was configured to use system wide bayes database for the bayesian classifier, which is trained by both sa's autolearn feature and by sa-

Re: [Virtual + Spamassassin] Alias table is evaluated twice

Dnia 20.08.2022 o godz. 11:28:43 ha...@posteo.de pisze: we're about to use Spamassassin in our postfix mail system. For that reason we "copied" our mail system to a virtual machine in order to see how Spamassassin is configured correctly. After we enabled Spamassassin we'r

Re: [Virtual + Spamassassin] Alias table is evaluated twice

Dnia 20.08.2022 o godz. 11:28:43 ha...@posteo.de pisze: > > we're about to use Spamassassin in our postfix mail system. For that reason > we "copied" our mail system to a virtual machine in order to see how > Spamassassin is configured correctly. > > After we

[Virtual + Spamassassin] Alias table is evaluated twice

Hi, we're about to use Spamassassin in our postfix mail system. For that reason we "copied" our mail system to a virtual machine in order to see how Spamassassin is configured correctly. After we enabled Spamassassin we're facing the problem that the virtual table is eva

Re: Prevent local mail from going via spamassassin milter

Many thanks for all the replies. Appreciated! > make sure to configure your milter to ignore connections from 127.0.0.0/8 This was the reply that did it. It spurred me to investigate the /etc/default/spamass-milter config, wherein I had... OPTIONS="-u spamass-milter -- -d 127.0.0.1" On looki

Re: Prevent local mail from going via spamassassin milter

On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 01:01:22PM -0400, Bill Cole wrote: > > mua_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks > > permit_sasl_authenticated permit > > That is VERY BAD. > > Your submission service appears to be an open relay. Change the final > 'permit' to 'reject' to fix that. Note that the O

Re: Prevent local mail from going via spamassassin milter

On 2022-07-07 at 09:26:43 UTC-0400 (Thu, 7 Jul 2022 14:26:43 +0100) Linkcheck is rumored to have said: I have a relatively new installation of postfix with clamav and spamassassin milters. In general it seems to work fine. The debian server sends a variety of notifications from localhost

Re: Prevent local mail from going via spamassassin milter

Linkcheck: > I have a relatively new installation of postfix with clamav and spamassassin > milters. In general it seems to work fine. > > The debian server sends a variety of notifications from localhost through > postfix to a domain mailbox ad...@example.co.uk. On the way i

Re: Prevent local mail from going via spamassassin milter

Dnia 7.07.2022 o godz. 14:26:43 Linkcheck pisze: > I have a relatively new installation of postfix with clamav and spamassassin > milters. In general it seems to work fine. > > The debian server sends a variety of notifications from localhost through > postfix to a do

Prevent local mail from going via spamassassin milter

I have a relatively new installation of postfix with clamav and spamassassin milters. In general it seems to work fine. The debian server sends a variety of notifications from localhost through postfix to a domain mailbox ad...@example.co.uk. On the way it's filtered by spamassassin, whi

Re: passing mail through postfix/spamassassin system

At Tue, 25 May 2021 12:56:15 -0400 (EDT), pnew...@toosan.com wrote:- >Good afternoon! > >I have set up a postfix/spamassassin (PF/SA) system that is handling mail for >three of my domains enroute to the system that end-users ultimately retrieve >mail from (rackspace). It is wo

Re: passing mail through postfix/spamassassin system

On 5/25/2021 11:56 AM, pnew...@toosan.com wrote: Good afternoon! I have set up a postfix/spamassassin (PF/SA) system that is handling mail for three of my domains enroute to the system that end-users ultimately retrieve mail from (rackspace). It is working but I had to do it in a convoluted

passing mail through postfix/spamassassin system

Good afternoon! I have set up a postfix/spamassassin (PF/SA) system that is handling mail for three of my domains enroute to the system that end-users ultimately retrieve mail from (rackspace). It is working but I had to do it in a convoluted way that I am not happy about. My scenario: MX

Re: Emails not received when attempting per-user spamassassin command when sending to multiple recipients on a server

On 5 Apr 2021, at 17:49, Steve Dondley wrote: Sending to pe...@example.org works with these SA settings in master.cf: smtp inet n - y - -smtpd -o content_filter=spamassassin -o receive_override_options=no_address_mappings spamassassin unix - n n

Re: Emails not received when attempting per-user spamassassin command when sending to multiple recipients on a server

On 5 Apr 2021, at 17:49, Steve Dondley wrote: Sending to pe...@example.org works with these SA settings in master.cf: smtp inet n - y - -smtpd -o content_filter=spamassassin -o receive_override_options=no_address_mappings spamassassin unix - n

Emails not received when attempting per-user spamassassin command when sending to multiple recipients on a server

Sending to pe...@example.org works with these SA settings in master.cf: smtp inet n - y - -smtpd -o content_filter=spamassassin -o receive_override_options=no_address_mappings spamassassin unix - n n - - pipe user=debian

Re: spamassassin user_prefs getting ignore

On 21 Mar 2021, at 11:51, Steve Dondley wrote: user=debian-spamd argv=/usr/bin/spamc -u ${user} -f -e /usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f ${sender} ${recipient} On 23.03.21 05:31, @lbutlr wrote: As Bill Cole said, the -f is obsolete, is not needed, and does literally nothing. If you check the man p

Re: spamassassin user_prefs getting ignore

On 21 Mar 2021, at 11:51, Steve Dondley wrote: > user=debian-spamd argv=/usr/bin/spamc -u ${user} -f -e /usr/sbin/sendmail > -oi -f ${sender} ${recipient} As Bill Cole said, the -f is obsolete, is not needed, and does literally nothing. If you check the man page for spamc, you will see that t

Re: spamassassin user_prefs getting ignore

=debian-spamd argv=/usr/bin/spamc -u ${recipient} -f -e /usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f ${sender} ${recipient} but that didn't help. Also, the permissions on ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs are world readable.

Re: spamassassin user_prefs getting ignore

On 21 Mar 2021, at 12:54, Steve Dondley wrote: I'd like to configure postfix so the configuration settings in the per-user configuration file at ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs get applied. This user_prefs config file is used with the spamassassin command as evidenced with spamassass

Re: spamassassin user_prefs getting ignore

spamassassin unix - n n - - pipe user=debian-spamd argv=/usr/bin/spamc -f -e /usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f ${sender} ${recipient} I modified the above to: user=debian-spamd argv=/usr/bin/spamc -u ${recipient} -f -e /usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f ${sender

spamassassin user_prefs getting ignore

I'd like to configure postfix so the configuration settings in the per-user configuration file at ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs get applied. This user_prefs config file is used with the spamassassin command as evidenced with spamassassin -D < spam.txt. But as far as I can tell, the us

Re: spamassassin & bayes

;> From: Daniel Armando Rodriguez > >> > >> Hi > >> > >> Suddenly I'm facing tons of this messages > >> > >> ... bayes: cannot open bayes databases > >> /home/spamd/.spamassassin/bayes_* R/W: lock failed: File exists > >>

Re: spamassassin & bayes

Hi Maybe use redis for bayes rules On 27.01.2021 23:33, Richard wrote: > >> Date: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 19:17:48 -0300 >> From: Daniel Armando Rodriguez >> >> Hi >> >> Suddenly I'm facing tons of this messages >> >> ... bayes: cannot

Re: spamassassin & bayes

Hi, I've switched to REDIS for bayesian storage in Spamassassin more than 4 years ago, and I've never looked back: very good performances and no problem with files (like locking for a start). I wrote about it at the time, unfortunately it's in French ;) https://www.patpro.net

Re: spamassassin & bayes

On 27-01-2021 23:26, Patrick Proniewski wrote: Hi, I've switched to REDIS for bayesian storage in Spamassassin more than 4 years ago, and I've never looked back: very good performances and no problem with files (like locking for a start). I wrote about it at the time, unfortunate

Re: spamassassin & bayes

> Date: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 19:17:48 -0300 > From: Daniel Armando Rodriguez > > Hi > > Suddenly I'm facing tons of this messages > > ... bayes: cannot open bayes databases > /home/spamd/.spamassassin/bayes_* R/W: lock failed: File exists > &

spamassassin & bayes

Hi Suddenly I'm facing tons of this messages ... bayes: cannot open bayes databases /home/spamd/.spamassassin/bayes_* R/W: lock failed: File exists A 'solution' found on the web says disable bayes, reload SA, delete such files and enable bayes again. Increased values in defaul

Re: virtual_alias_maps ignored after switching from spamassassin (amavis) to rspamd (milter)

On 18.01.21 12:45, Daniel Caillibaud wrote: >After switching to rspamd (was amavis+spamassassin), virtual_alias_maps seems to be ignored >(mail to aliases address are bounced with "user unknown"), and I don't find why… Le 18/01/21 à 13:13, Matus UHLAR - fantomas a é

Re: virtual_alias_maps ignored after switching from spamassassin (amavis) to rspamd (milter)

Le 18/01/21 à 13:13, Matus UHLAR - fantomas a écrit : > On 18.01.21 12:45, Daniel Caillibaud wrote: > >After switching to rspamd (was amavis+spamassassin), virtual_alias_maps > >seems to be ignored > >(mail to aliases address are bounced with "user unknown"), and I

Re: virtual_alias_maps ignored after switching from spamassassin (amavis) to rspamd (milter)

On 18.01.21 12:45, Daniel Caillibaud wrote: After switching to rspamd (was amavis+spamassassin), virtual_alias_maps seems to be ignored (mail to aliases address are bounced with "user unknown"), and I don't find why… you turned on: receive_override_options = no_address_mappi

virtual_alias_maps ignored after switching from spamassassin (amavis) to rspamd (milter)

Hi, After switching to rspamd (was amavis+spamassassin), virtual_alias_maps seems to be ignored (mail to aliases address are bounced with "user unknown"), and I don't find why… 1) Before (all is fine with virtual_alias_maps) content_filter=amavis:[127.0.0.1]:10024 milt

Re: non_smtp_milters don't work with spamassassin

/opendkim.sock But when I receive non-smtp mail (typically LMTP, from a contact form from a website on the same server) I see no spamassassin headers. I do see DKIM headers though, so local miltering is working, just not for spamassassin. Does anyone have an idea on how I can get this to work? I doubt it is a

Re: non_smtp_milters don't work with spamassassin

/opendkim.sock But when I receive non-smtp mail (typically LMTP, from a contact form from a website on the same server) I see no spamassassin headers. I do see DKIM headers though, so local miltering is working, just not for spamassassin. Does anyone have an idea on how I can get this to work? I doubt it is a

Re: non_smtp_milters don't work with spamassassin

k, > unix:/var/run/opendkim/opendkim.sock > > But when I receive non-smtp mail (typically LMTP, from a contact form > from a website on the same server) I see no spamassassin headers. I do > see DKIM headers though, so local miltering is working, just not for > spamassassin. Does

non_smtp_milters don't work with spamassassin

contact form from a website on the same server) I see no spamassassin headers. I do see DKIM headers though, so local miltering is working, just not for spamassassin. Does anyone have an idea on how I can get this to work?

fyi, +1 on lightweight postfix spam milter alternative: 'spamassassin-milter'

for anyone interested, 'spamassassin-milter' https://gitlab.com/glts/spamassassin-milter a modern/current, rust-coded, SpamAssassin milter -- that cleanly submits msgs via spamc to spamd -- is, for me, working quite nicely with current/latest Postfix. it appears to be l

Re: lightweight/milter Spamassassin-integtration options for Postfix -- current experience / faves?

On 6/10/20 2:05 PM, Bill Cole wrote: > It uses the installed SpamAssasssin Perl modules directly, just as spamd does. fact noted. details admittedly i'll have to poke around in. > The socket permissions issues are probably solvable, but if running on the > loopback interface works, > there's no

Re: lightweight/milter Spamassassin-integtration options for Postfix -- current experience / faves?

On 10 Jun 2020, at 14:37, PGNet Dev wrote: spampd worked well enough, when listening on tcp host:port. listening on socket, i couldn't get past postfix permissions issues, despite similar setup to other policy daemons in use. that makes me a bit antsy. as does not using 'native', up-to-date sp

Re: lightweight/milter Spamassassin-integtration options for Postfix -- current experience / faves?

I’ve been using my own spamassassin-milter (your third option) with Postfix 3.3.0 for a few months and am happy with it. This project is ‘done’, the initial development phase is through, but it is active. (I wrote about the why in these places:) https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox

Re: lightweight/milter Spamassassin-integtration options for Postfix -- current experience / faves?

On 6/9/20 5:40 AM, Marvin Renich wrote: >> https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/spamass-milt/ >> https://github.com/mpaperno/spampd >> https://gitlab.com/glts/spamassassin-milter >> >> anyone have any current experience with any of these? > > I al

Re: lightweight/milter Spamassassin-integtration options for Postfix -- current experience / faves?

* PGNet Dev [200608 19:19]: >https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/spamass-milt/ >https://github.com/mpaperno/spampd >https://gitlab.com/glts/spamassassin-milter > > anyone have any current experience with any of these? I also use the first one (Debian package spamas

Re: lightweight/milter Spamassassin-integtration options for Postfix -- current experience / faves?

Dnia 8.06.2020 o godz. 16:18:14 PGNet Dev pisze: > >https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/spamass-milt/ >https://github.com/mpaperno/spampd >https://gitlab.com/glts/spamassassin-milter > > anyone have any current experience with any of these? I use the first

Re: lightweight/milter Spamassassin-integtration options for Postfix -- current experience / faves?

I run the dusty one: 'spamass-milt' 0.4, it appears to be working well here. On 6/9/20 1:18 AM, PGNet Dev wrote: > i run postfix 3.5.2 > > i'm > > -- revisiting spamassassin integration with postfix > > -- not interested in amavisd integration or rspamd altern

Re: lightweight/milter Spamassassin-integtration options for Postfix -- current experience / faves?

spamass-milt/ > >https://github.com/mpaperno/spampd > >https://gitlab.com/glts/spamassassin-milter > > > > anyone have any current experience with any of these? > > spampd is stable, no bad experiences here with it, i just now use fuglu > > > recommendation

Re: lightweight/milter Spamassassin-integtration options for Postfix -- current experience / faves?

On 2020-06-09 01:18, PGNet Dev wrote: https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/spamass-milt/ https://github.com/mpaperno/spampd https://gitlab.com/glts/spamassassin-milter anyone have any current experience with any of these? spampd is stable, no bad experiences here with it, i just now

lightweight/milter Spamassassin-integtration options for Postfix -- current experience / faves?

i run postfix 3.5.2 i'm -- revisiting spamassassin integration with postfix -- not interested in amavisd integration or rspamd alternative -- looking for lightweight & known to be (still/currently) reliable & active -- ideally, tho not absolutely req'd, milter-protocol --

Re: OpenDKIM , Postfix , SpamAssassin, Amavisd-New, SPF and FreeBSD

You actually got me on right track. Peeled back the onion abit to how OpenDkim was being started I looked in more depth at start up script used by rc.cof.It was looking for a opendkim.conf in /usr/local/etc/mail not /usr/local/etc/opemdkim Copied opedkim.conf back that and all is good T

Re: OpenDKIM , Postfix , SpamAssassin, Amavisd-New, SPF and FreeBSD

The thing is … that isn an INCOMING not an outgoing email.. Maybe its is failing a DKIM test for incoming I can’t seem to get OpenDKIM to sign my OUTGOING > On Oct 25, 2019, at 1:17 PM, Fazzina, Angelo > wrote: > > > From what I can tell the DNS record was

Re: OpenDKIM , Postfix , SpamAssassin, Amavisd-New, SPF and FreeBSD

On October 25, 2019 9:58:28 PM GMT+02:00, Jason Hirsh wrote: >I am getting entries in my maiillog, but only in regards to OpenDKIM >working to verify INCOMING >These are clearly entries from OpenDKIM. There is nothing >corresponding for actions relative to outgoing mail What happens when you c

Re: OpenDKIM , Postfix , SpamAssassin, Amavisd-New, SPF and FreeBSD

I am getting entries in my maiillog, but only in regards to OpenDKIM working to verify INCOMING These are clearly entries from OpenDKIM. There is nothing corresponding for actions relative to outgoing mail Jason > On Oct 25, 2019, at 3:52 PM, Christian Kivalo > wrote: > > On October 25, 201

Re: OpenDKIM , Postfix , SpamAssassin, Amavisd-New, SPF and FreeBSD

On October 25, 2019 6:52:52 PM GMT+02:00, Jason Hirsh wrote: >I have gone over my configuration with a fine tooth comb, but >considering I put them together it is not surprising I can’t spot >anything > > >O have been trying to locate opendkim action in my log file. It >appears that that the mai

Re: OpenDKIM , Postfix , SpamAssassin, Amavisd-New, SPF and FreeBSD

I am trying to get rid of the amount of background I was pretty sure that OPenDKIM should be doing the hard lifting.The think that is throwing me for a loop is the absence of any indication of it operating in conjunction with the outgoing mail in the mallow. As show else where it is invol

Re: OpenDKIM , Postfix , SpamAssassin, Amavisd-New, SPF and FreeBSD

Jason Hirsh: > I have gone over my configuration with a fine tooth comb, but considering I > put them together it is not surprising I can?t spot anything > > > O have been trying to locate opendkim action in my log file. It appears that > that the mail is being reviewed but now header added >

Re: OpenDKIM , Postfix , SpamAssassin, Amavisd-New, SPF and FreeBSD

Ahh .. Interesting I had not understood that But I am still not signing …. > On Oct 25, 2019, at 2:00 PM, Fazzina, Angelo > wrote: > > From your original email > > Modesv > > > You are verifying and signing so yes that seems to be the

  1   2   3   4   >