[SAtalk] Misc header filters

header X_ADVERT X-Advertisement =~ /./ describe X_ADVERT X-Advertisement header exists header X_AUTH_WARNING X-Authentication-Warning =~ /./ describe X_AUTH_WARNING X-Authentication-Warning header exists header DATE_WARNING Date-warning

[SAtalk] Preferred location for whitelist entries

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 What is the preferred location for personal whitelist entires... /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf or in Mail-Spamassassin-2.1/rules/60_whitelist.cf?? Mike Loiterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 7.0.4 Comment: Messa

Re: [SAtalk] Distributed Checksum Clearinghouse

I also think DCC is possibly more promising than razor -- last time I looked at it (increasingly long time ago now) DCC looked a bit immature though. Stick a feature request in bugzilla though and I'll take a look again soon. C On 3/1/02 10:17 PM, "Daniel Quinlan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I

[SAtalk] Distributed Checksum Clearinghouse

I only found one mention of DCC in the spamassassin-talk archive: http://www.geocrawler.com/archives/3/11679/2001/12/0/7434411/ Is anyone working on this or was the idea rejected? DCC seems very useful, possibly better than Razor. Here's the DCC home page: http://www.rhyolite.com/anti-spa

Re: [SAtalk] incoming mail delay

Craig Hughes writes: > Delaying mail delivery sounds like something best done outside of SA. You > can read the score, then choose to delay delivery and re-submit to SA later > or something. SA really doesn't want to start acting as a MTA I don't > think. I agree as far as feeding emails back

Re: [SAtalk] incoming mail delay

Delaying mail delivery sounds like something best done outside of SA. You can read the score, then choose to delay delivery and re-submit to SA later or something. SA really doesn't want to start acting as a MTA I don't think. C On 3/1/02 9:48 PM, "Daniel Quinlan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >

Re: [SAtalk] OT: a new game?

Michael Moncur wrote: >>I say why bother thinking? Hit 'D' and be done with it. >> > >I guess it's my insatiable curiosity. Don't tell me I'm the only one who gets >these? Maybe I need to talk to some of my friends who have too much time on >their hands. > You are the only one who gets these. :-

Re: [SAtalk] Does "spamassasin -r" strip spam reporting?

Matthew Cline wrote: >Does "spamassasin -r" strip all the spam reporting stuff from the message >before it's sent to Razor? Or is it merely a wrapper around "razor-report"? >I'd like to use it to report spam that doesn't go above the auto-report >thershhold, but I don't like having to manual

Re: [SAtalk] BIZ_WIZ style rule

Daniel Quinlan wrote: >I've been experimenting with rules to catch "BIZ_WIZ" style email >addresses where it's a compound email address composed of related >parts, usually in grammatical order. New spammers seem to adopt the >same basic formula from time-to-time, so it should be possible to >cat

[SAtalk] A better alternative to test ROUND_THE_WORLD

I would like to suggest that the ROUND_THE_WORLD test, which seems to catch little real spam these days. (Maybe it's just me.) I would submit for the group's slings and arrows, as a better substitute, a rule that seems to work well for me: header FROM_SPAMLANDReceived =~ /\.(?:kr|cn|cl|ar

[SAtalk] incoming mail delay

It seems like a fair amount of spam doesn't get caught by RBL or Razor because insufficient time has passed before spamassassin processes it. People who don't mind a delay could profit from not processing email for a short period of time, say an hour. This feature could be coupled with a "require

[SAtalk] BIZ_WIZ style rule

I've been experimenting with rules to catch "BIZ_WIZ" style email addresses where it's a compound email address composed of related parts, usually in grammatical order. New spammers seem to adopt the same basic formula from time-to-time, so it should be possible to catch them too. For example:

RE: [SAtalk] OT: a new game?

> I say why bother thinking? Hit 'D' and be done with it. I guess it's my insatiable curiosity. Don't tell me I'm the only one who gets these? Maybe I need to talk to some of my friends who have too much time on their hands. > C > > Michael Moncur wrote: > > > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 10:15:52 -0

[SAtalk] Auto Razor Reporting try #2

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Last one got used in another thread...I'll try again. I'm trying to set up a local mail account that I can forward all uncaught spam so that it will be reported to Razor. How should I go about doing this? Would I just need a procmail recipe? If s

[SAtalk] Does "spamassasin -r" strip spam reporting?

Does "spamassasin -r" strip all the spam reporting stuff from the message before it's sent to Razor? Or is it merely a wrapper around "razor-report"? I'd like to use it to report spam that doesn't go above the auto-report thershhold, but I don't like having to manually strip out the spam repo

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

On 3/1/02 8:20 PM, "dman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | and even if it did, it would still be impossible to solve > | every problem (Goedel's incompleteness theorem anyone?) > > Wrong theorem, IMO. You can't solve any problems in a perfect world > because if a problem existed, the world wouldn

Re: [SAtalk] Deadlock using spamc and spamass-milter

On 3/1/02 8:25 PM, "dman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't have those manpages, and I don't think spamc should be > creating arbitrarily large buffers. Keep system resource usage at a > (reasonable) minimum by moving the data sooner rather than using a > "store-and-forward" technique. http:

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

dman writes: >Wrong theorem, IMO. You can't solve any problems in a perfect world >because if a problem existed, the world wouldn't be perfect. In a >perfect world, no problems exist, which is why they can't be sovled :-). That sounds like a problem to me! ;-) --Bill. -- William R Ward

Re: [SAtalk] Deadlock using spamc and spamass-milter

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 06:53:05PM -0800, Craig Hughes wrote: | On 3/1/02 4:01 PM, "dman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | | > On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 01:42:00PM -0500, Michael Brown wrote: | > | I've come across a problem in the spamc/spamass-milt combo when sending | > large | > | mail messages (>2

Re: [SAtalk] Good thing I live in CA

Craig Hughes wrote: > Yay, I get to vote against this punk next week. > > C > > > > Rep. Bill Jones Thinks Spam is "Innovative" > [Spam] Posted by CmdrTaco on 04:16 PM March 1st, 2002 > from the when-is-election-year? dept. > GMontag writes "Wired is running this story:Candidate: Spam in Every >

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 07:09:33PM -0800, Craig Hughes wrote: | On 3/1/02 5:26 PM, "William R Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > In a perfect world, whitelist shouldn't be necessary. Of course. In a perfect world there would be no spam either (which is the only reason a white or black list e

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 06:27:05PM -0800, William R Ward wrote: | Am I correct in assuming that unless I use the -r option to complain | about spam, spamassassin does not attempt to notify the sender's ISP | or such? It wasn't clear from the documentation. It doesn't notify the sender's ISP on

Re: [SAtalk] How to use spamassassin-sightings with KMail?

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 07:28:19PM -0800, Matthew Cline wrote: | I tried to send some false-negatives to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... | inflexible.xo.com [207.155.252.33] was 550 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... User ^ Friend of your's too, eh? ;-)

Re: [SAtalk] Setting up Auto Razor Reporting?

You're using razor 1.20 which has that as a "feature". Downgrade to 1.19 until Vipul gets back from India and fixes 1.20 (or releases a fixed 1.21). C On 3/1/02 7:49 PM, "Matthew Cline" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When I try using razor-report from the command line, I get this from the > diag

Re: [SAtalk] Setting up Auto Razor Reporting?

old, known problem ... downgrade to razor agfents 1.19 ... On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Matthew Cline wrote: > When I try using razor-report from the command line, I get this from the > diagnostics: > > debug: Razor Agents 1.20, protocol version 2. > debug: Read server list from /usr/home/matt/.razor-r

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

William R Ward wrote: >In a perfect world, whitelist shouldn't be necessary. > In a perfect world, we shouldn't be sitting here discussing ways to filter spam from our inboxes. But here we are. -- http://www.pricegrabber.com | Dog is my co-pilot.

Re: [SAtalk] Setting up Auto Razor Reporting?

When I try using razor-report from the command line, I get this from the diagnostics: debug: Razor Agents 1.20, protocol version 2. debug: Read server list from /usr/home/matt/.razor-report.lst debug: 78733 seconds before closest server discovery debug: Closest server is 64.90.187.2 debug: Agent

RE: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

> > In a perfect world, whitelist shouldn't be necessary. > > I disagree. Looking at the message you forwarded, there is no way to > distinguish it from spam (even as a human). If I received that mail and it > were not tagged as spam, I would consider that a false-negative. I agree with Craig.

[SAtalk] False FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD

These headers gave me a false FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD: Received: (qmail 3704 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2002 03:34:28 - Received: from n22.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.72) by nightrealms.com with SMTP; 2 Mar 2002 03:34:28 - X-eGroups-Return: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from [216.115.97.190

Re: [SAtalk] How to use spamassassin-sightings with KMail?

Yes, please forward the emails as an attachment instead of bouncing them. C On 3/1/02 7:28 PM, "Matthew Cline" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I tried to send some false-negatives to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with KMail's "Redirect" function, but it was reject with the following > diagnostics: > >

[SAtalk] How to use spamassassin-sightings with KMail?

I tried to send some false-negatives to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with KMail's "Redirect" function, but it was reject with the following diagnostics: - Your message to mail.sourceforge.net was rejected. I said:     . And mail.sourceforge.net responded with     550 rejected: there is no valid sender

RE: [SAtalk] Setting up Auto Razor Reporting?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 This just isn't working. I keeping getting an unknown user error. I've tried Spam: "| /usr/bin/spamassassin -r" Spam: "|/usr/bin/spamassassin -r" Spam: | /usr/bin/spamassin -r None are working for me. Mike Loiterman [EMAIL PROTECT

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

On 3/1/02 5:26 PM, "William R Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sidney Markowitz writes: >> On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 16:37, William R Ward wrote: > There's a lot of legitimate e-mail about money in the world... I think > that perhaps that criteria should be refined and/or deemphasized. It's not em

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

On 3/1/02 4:37 PM, "William R Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sidney Markowitz writes: >> On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 14:34, William R Ward wrote: >>> This is *not* spam... >> >> If I were to receive that Rich Dad email unsolicited it would clearly be >> spam. The only way Spamassassin could know t

Re: [SAtalk] blacklist_to; reporting spam

On 3/1/02 4:35 PM, "William R Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > rODbegbie writes: >> Quoting William R Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >>> There are "whitelist_from" and "whitelist_to" but "blacklist_from" is >>> the only form for blacklist. I'd like to propose that "blacklist_to" >>> would be a

Re: [SAtalk] Deadlock using spamc and spamass-milter

On 3/1/02 4:01 PM, "dman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 01:42:00PM -0500, Michael Brown wrote: > | I've come across a problem in the spamc/spamass-milt combo when sending > large > | mail messages (>2MB in my case). > | > | From what I can see, the way spamc works is that

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

Sidney Markowitz writes: >On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 17:52, William R Ward wrote: >> Hmm, looks like I was wrong. It does apparently have spammish >> headers. I don't know anything about osirusoft.com, but spamassassin >> says it's a spammer > >Actually I would say that I was wrong. Spamassassin did

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

dman writes: >On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 05:52:10PM -0800, William R Ward wrote: >| If osirusoft.com is a spam relay, then what should I say to the Rich >| Dad people to convince them to not use it? > >osirusoft (if you check out their web site) is a site that provides >DNS-based blacklisting of site

[SAtalk] Re: RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, William R. Ward wrote: > Sidney Markowitz writes: >>On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 16:37, William R Ward wrote: [...] >>> To the best of my knowledge, [EMAIL PROTECTED] does not send spam. >>> It's mail for an affiliate program that I signed up for. >> >>In general it is a good idea t

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 05:52:10PM -0800, William R Ward wrote: | William R Ward writes: | >I'm not asking for a global whitelist entry. I'm saying that the | >e-mail didn't have any spammish headers, and the body of the | >message seems like an innocuous announcement to me. | > | >I think the pr

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 17:52, William R Ward wrote: > Hmm, looks like I was wrong. It does apparently have spammish > headers. I don't know anything about osirusoft.com, but spamassassin > says it's a spammer Actually I would say that I was wrong. Spamassassin did not think that the body was spa

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

William R Ward writes: >I'm not asking for a global whitelist entry. I'm saying that the >e-mail didn't have any spammish headers, and the body of the >message seems like an innocuous announcement to me. > >I think the problem might be because "cash" and "rich" are in the >body. That in itself d

Re: [SAtalk] Setting up Auto Razor Reporting?

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 07:39:24PM -0600, Mike Loiterman wrote: > I'm trying to set up a local mail account that I can forward all > uncaught spam so that it will be reported to Razor. How should I go > about doing this? Would I just need a procmail recipe? If so, what > would it look like. Any

[SAtalk] Setting up Auto Razor Reporting?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'm trying to set up a local mail account that I can forward all uncaught spam so that it will be reported to Razor. How should I go about doing this? Would I just need a procmail recipe? If so, what would it look like. Any help is appreciated.

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

Sidney Markowitz writes: >On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 16:37, William R Ward wrote: >> >and therefore not spam to you is for you to put it in your whitelist. >> >> I did. > >And it was still marked spam? That sounds like a bug and you should post >the full message with headers including the spam report

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 16:37, William R Ward wrote: > >and therefore not spam to you is for you to put it in your whitelist. > > I did. And it was still marked spam? That sounds like a bug and you should post the full message with headers including the spam report if you want it to be possible to

Re: [SAtalk] Rule idea: "real name" == local part

On 28 Feb 2002 at 16:44, Greg Ward wrote: > [I suggest a new rule] > > Here's a quick and dirty attempt: > > > > header TO_REALNAME_EQ_LOCALPARTTo =~ /\"?(\w+)\"?\s+<\1\@[^<>]+>/i > > describe TO_REALNAME_EQ_LOCALPART Real name in "To:" equals local part > > score TO_REALNAME_EQ_LOCALPART

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

Sidney Markowitz writes: >On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 14:34, William R Ward wrote: >> This is *not* spam... > >If I were to receive that Rich Dad email unsolicited it would clearly be >spam. The only way Spamassassin could know that it is not unsolicited >and therefore not spam to you is for you to put

Re: [SAtalk] blacklist_to; reporting spam

rODbegbie writes: >Quoting William R Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> There are "whitelist_from" and "whitelist_to" but "blacklist_from" is >> the only form for blacklist. I'd like to propose that "blacklist_to" >> would be a good idea. Is there a reason why this is not there? > >There is a sneaky

Re: [SAtalk] blacklist_to; reporting spam

Quoting William R Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > There are "whitelist_from" and "whitelist_to" but "blacklist_from" is > the only form for blacklist. I'd like to propose that "blacklist_to" > would be a good idea. Is there a reason why this is not there? There is a sneaky work-around... If you a

Re: [SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 14:34, William R Ward wrote: > This is *not* spam... If I were to receive that Rich Dad email unsolicited it would clearly be spam. The only way Spamassassin could know that it is not unsolicited and therefore not spam to you is for you to put it in your whitelist. If [EMAI

Re: [SAtalk] Deadlock using spamc and spamass-milter

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 01:42:00PM -0500, Michael Brown wrote: | I've come across a problem in the spamc/spamass-milt combo when sending large | mail messages (>2MB in my case). | | From what I can see, the way spamc works is that a message is passed to it on | stdin, then stdin is closed. After

Re: [SAtalk] report-template and HTML email

dman writes: >Both 1.5 and 2.01 do put the report in the body of an HTML message. >What they don't do is format it in HTML, the result being that line >breaks and indentation are all lost and the report looks ugly. The >best solution would be for SA to create a new (inline) plain-text MIME >secti

[SAtalk] Good thing I live in CA

Yay, I get to vote against this punk next week. C Rep. Bill Jones Thinks Spam is "Innovative" [Spam] Posted by CmdrTaco on 04:16 PM March 1st, 2002 from the when-is-election-year? dept. GMontag writes "Wired is running this story:Candidate: Spam in Every Pot about candidate-for-gov

Re: [SAtalk] Nigerian scam filter improvements

On Friday 01 March 2002 05:40 am, Greg Ward wrote: > Wow, good work! One question: I have seen several "Nigerian" scams that > are actually about Zimbabwe or Sierra Leone or some other African > country. (They sound like the same scam, though.) Does this collection > include any of those? It

[SAtalk] Idea: ignore self for auto-whitelist and identifcal to/from

I'm thinking of making patches to SA so that the auto-whitelist and identical to-from rules ignore messages that are from the user. This is because both rules interfere when I send myself messages to test SA, and there's some spammers who forge spam as comming from the user him/herself, so it

Re: [SAtalk] OT: a new game?

I say why bother thinking? Hit 'D' and be done with it. C Michael Moncur wrote: > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 10:15:52 -0700 > From: Michael Moncur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Spamassassin-Talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [SAtalk] OT: a new game? > > This isn't really on topic, but there are a lot

[SAtalk] blacklist_to; reporting spam

I own a few domains where all mail for any address at that domain gets dumped into a mailbox. For some reason, some of these addresses are not valid and have never been valid, and get nothing but spam, which spamassassin tends to miss. There are "whitelist_from" and "whitelist_to" but "blacklis

RE: [SAtalk] RBL Configuration

> -Original Message- > From: Casey Woods [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 12:15 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SAtalk] RBL Configuration > > > I'm using MimeDefang with SpamAssassin and it is working very > well. My question is this: how do I go about

Re: [SAtalk] suggestion don't put * * * S P A M * * * in subject

I'd add there are probably many users who are not sophisticated enough to understand how to create filters, but are very happy just having the message headers visibly tagged in their inbox. (eg my mom) C Andrew Kohlsmith wrote: > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:13:26 -0500 > From: Andrew Kohlsmith

Re: [SAtalk] razor check skipped: No such file or directory undefinedRazor::Client

There is a bug in razor 1.20 which causes the library to fail to load for some reason. Vipul is apparently travelling to India at the moment, so the current solution is to downgrade to razor 1.19 C Christopher Albert wrote: > Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 12:58:11 -0500 > From: Christopher Albert <

Re: [SAtalk] rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS not working right

On 01 March 2002, Craig R Hughes said: > Just changed it in CVS to: > > header SUBJ_ALL_CAPS Subject =~ /^[^a-z]*$/ But that'll match an empty subject. (No comments on whether that's a spam discriminator, but it probably happens more often in non-spam than an "ALL CAPS" subject does

[SAtalk] Newbie question spamc options

I have install spamassassin and have it running sort of. I use sendmail 8.12.1 with the spamass-milter for a site-wide configuration. I wrote the init.d script to invoke spamd and one for spamass-milter then I added the Input_Mail_Filter run into my sendmail.cf file. I'm running into a problem wh

Re: [SAtalk] RBL Configuration

Casey, You can activate individual RBLs by changing their scores to something other than 0 -- the best place to make the scoring change is in /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf but the example lines to change are in /usr/share/spamassassin/50_scores.cf -- just copy them to local.cf and edit them

Re: [SAtalk] suggestion don't put * * * S P A M * * * in subject

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Friday, 1. March 2002 19:13 schrieben Sie: > > That also encourages proper filtering rather than the breaindead method > > of matching on subject. > Many email clients cannot filter on aribitrary hea

[SAtalk] Deadlock using spamc and spamass-milter

I've come across a problem in the spamc/spamass-milt combo when sending large mail messages (>2MB in my case). >From what I can see, the way spamc works is that a message is passed to it on stdin, then stdin is closed. After stdin is closed, spamc sends it to spamd for processing. It looks like

[SAtalk] spamproxyd with exim 4

Has anyone setup spamproxyd with Exim 4 or 3.35 Sean -- BBS and Fidonet News Portal at http://www.tcob1.net Offering feeds for Fidonet, Adventurenet, and many other nets See http://www.tcob1.net for more details ICQ: 679813 Linux User: 231986 TCOB1 BBS: 095 43852 Yahoo: tcob_1 __

Re: [SAtalk] rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS not working right

Just changed it in CVS to: header SUBJ_ALL_CAPS Subject =~ /^[^a-z]*$/ C Greg Ward wrote: > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:49:34 -0500 > From: Greg Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS not working right > > On 01 March 2002, Evert J

Re: [SAtalk] make test breaks, 2.1, RH 7.2

Yes, this happens when you have a user prefs file which tells SA not to do standard things like subject_rewriting and stuff. I'll fix it sometime soon. C Rob McMillin wrote: > Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 23:45:39 -0800 > From: Rob McMillin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: SAtalk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sub

Re: [SAtalk] Filter idea: non-spammish mail agents

After all the bashing about scores <-5, I'd suggest scoring these around -2 or -3: they're extremely easy to forge if you're a spammer. C Matthew Cline wrote: > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 00:40:41 -0800 > From: Matthew Cline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SAtalk] Filter ide

Re: [SAtalk] report-template and HTML email

Well, the "fix" I adopted was to enter a feature request in bugzilla to add code to make the report a text/plain MIME part stuck into the beginning of the email, and leave the existing text/plain and/or text/html parts in there unchanged. If you're interested, it's http://bugzilla.spamassassin.

Re: [SAtalk] rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS not working right

The key to this rule is it triggers if there's no lower case in the subject. It's somewhat misnamed. If you're seeing legitimate subject lines with no lower case letters in them, please forward the subject lines so we can analyze and adapt the rule. Thanks. C Evert Jan van Ramselaar wrote:

Re: [SAtalk] SpamAssasin body results not added, but headers are

On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 05:53:59PM -0800, Matthew Cline wrote: | The following email was marked as spam, and had the X-Spam-Flag and | X-Spam-Status headers set properly, but the result lines starting with | "SPAM:" weren't added to the body. | [...] | MIME-Version: 1.0 | Content-Type: multipart/

Re: [SAtalk] report-template and HTML email

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 12:09:11PM -0500, Robbie Morrison wrote: | I have read the thread "question regarding report-template and HTML | email" and was wondering if anyone has solved this problem. | | I have tried putting the report in the header, which does not corrupt | the html email message.

RE: [SAtalk] rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS not working right

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > -Original Message- > From: Craig R Hughes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 8:07 PM > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS not working right > > > The key to this rule is it triggers if there's no lower case i

Re: [SAtalk] rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS not working right

Yes, it's not ideally suited to non-[A-Za-z] people at the moment. I tried fixing that somewhat with switching to [:lower:] but that means your locale needs to be set right for the emails you're receiving, and also means that you need perl >=5.6 C Gunter Ohrner wrote: > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 200

Re: [SAtalk] Rule idea: "real name" == local part

That's all you need to modify to have the GA pick it up for scoring. But everyone who's submitted nonspam for the corpus needs to re-run their mass-check to pick this new rule up. Once I have it in CVS that is. C Greg Ward wrote: > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:25:14 -0500 > From: Greg Ward <[EM

Re: [SAtalk] Filter idea: non-spammish mail agents

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Friday, 1. March 2002 13:15 schrieb Michael Moncur: > > > Here's something that I'm currently trying out: make a list of mail > > > user agents which are unlikely to be used for spam, and lower the hits > > > for mail that matches. Here's what I c

[SAtalk] RichDad.com e-mail is treated as spam

This is *not* spam... --- Begin Message --- We have the opportunity to share our Cashflow for Kids testimonials with a major TV Network! We are asking for help from our Rich Dad friends. Please email me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include your kid's stories and how they feel about the Cashflow

[SAtalk] RBL Configuration

I'm using MimeDefang with SpamAssassin and it is working very well. My question is this: how do I go about configuring which RBL services for SpamAssassin to use? Does the SpamAssassin RBL functionality work if I'm using MimeDefang? Thanks, Casey ___

Re: [SAtalk] suggestion don't put * * * S P A M * * * in subject

> That also encourages proper filtering rather than the breaindead method > of matching on subject. Many email clients cannot filter on aribitrary headers. KMail, for example (yes this is a corner case) does not let you define which header to watch; it has a list of commonly-used ones. I'm su

Re: [SAtalk] razor check skipped: No such file or directoryundefined Razor::Client

On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 09:58, Christopher Albert wrote: > I just installed [...]razor-agents-1.20 As Vilpul stated in the latest Razor version 1.20 is only for people who want to risk the bleeding edge, checked in without full testing

RE: [SAtalk] Global whitelist file?

The whitelist_from entries for a site would normally be in /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf -- Ed. > We've been attempting to setup a global whitelist for our SpamAssassin > installation in our office. We've tried > /usr/share/spamassassin/60_whitelist.cf and /etc/spammassassin.cf with > no luck?

[SAtalk] razor check skipped: No such file or directory undefined Razor::Client

Greetings, I just installed Mailscanner3.11-1,+sophos+razor-agents-1.20+Mail-SpamAssassin-2.1 on solaris 7 box, with all the prereqs.pm using perl 5.6.1 and CPAN. I get the error message on the subject line, even though Razor::Client is installed, and I can successfully use razor-check from th

[SAtalk] Global whitelist file?

We've been attempting to setup a global whitelist for our SpamAssassin installation in our office. We've tried /usr/share/spamassassin/60_whitelist.cf and /etc/spammassassin.cf with no luck? I've not found any documentation on this except for the auto_whitelist feature. Is this possible, and if so

[SAtalk] Annoying spam

I've attached an annoying spam that I've been getting repeatedly over the last few days. I just added a rule for 'sending mass messages' to score 2.0 and push this over five, However, I was thinking maybe a rule for 'sent to.*recipients' or something for 'messpro.com'. Any thoughts? Dan. -

[SAtalk] OT: a new game?

This isn't really on topic, but there are a lot of email experts here. Anyone recognize this? I seem to get a few of them every day or two. Is it really uncommercial spam, or another Outlook virus? It doesn't seem to have any attachments or scripts, though. Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: c

[SAtalk] report-template and HTML email

I have read the thread "question regarding report-template and HTML email" and was wondering if anyone has solved this problem. I have tried putting the report in the header, which does not corrupt the html email message. The problem is that I have about 3000 email accounts that spamassassin is m

Re: [SAtalk] suggestion don't put * * * S P A M * * * in subject

* Rob McMillin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > I think he meant that he didn't want to see the *** SPAM *** tag > appear in the Subject: line. What he needs to do is add > > rewrite_subject 0 > > in his user preferences, or the global prefs if he wants this change > system-wide (which I gather is th

Re: [SAtalk] suggestion don't put * * * S P A M * * * in subject

Charlie Watts wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]"> On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Sjaak Nabuurs VSM-Hosting.nl wrote: I suggest to user in this list do not put ***SPAM*** in the subjectline.I drop thes in a different map in my mail program and i think many otherusers. Don't filter based on the sub

Re: [SAtalk] suggestion don't put * * * S P A M * * * in subject

On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Sjaak Nabuurs VSM-Hosting.nl wrote: > I suggest to user in this list do not put ***SPAM*** in the subject > line. > > I drop thes in a different map in my mail program and i think many other > users. Don't filter based on the subject line. Filter on the X-Spam-Status header.

Re: [SAtalk] Filter idea: non-spammish mail agents

Greg Ward wrote: >On 01 March 2002, Nigel Metheringham said: > >>I can see the idea you are working on, but -10 seems a huge weighting >>for this rule (ie twice the default spam threshold). >> >Agreed. I'm as dubious of high negative scores as I am of high >positives. Gut instinct tells me -1 .

Re: [SAtalk] rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS not working right

On 01 March 2002, Evert Jan van Ramselaar said: > I get the idea the rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS is not working right in all > situations. > I have seen it getting triggered on a subject without any capital, > and on subjects with just one word in capitals. If you're using SA 2.1 with Perl 5.005, this rul

Re: [SAtalk] Filter idea: non-spammish mail agents

On 01 March 2002, Nigel Metheringham said: > I can see the idea you are working on, but -10 seems a huge weighting > for this rule (ie twice the default spam threshold). Agreed. I'm as dubious of high negative scores as I am of high positives. Gut instinct tells me -1 .. -2 for "non-spam" MUAs,

Re: [SAtalk] Nigerian scam filter improvements

On 28 February 2002, Matthew Cline said: > I got 179 Nigerian scam message bodies (though not headers) from > http://www.quatloos.com/cm-niger/cm-niger.htm, and used them to test out how > SA handles them. Testing with the default 2.2 setup (taken from CVS today), > 72 out of 179 is correctly

Re: [SAtalk] Rule idea: "real name" == local part

On 28 February 2002, Craig Hughes said: > Greg, I think I'm going to be busy for a few days just with scoring > refinements. If you could solidify the regex I'd appreciate it. OK, here's a patch relative to CVS: --- rules/20_head_tests.cf 26 Feb 2002 12:04:21 - 1.33 +++ rules/20_h

RE: [SAtalk] Filter idea: non-spammish mail agents

Gunter Ohrner writes: > Am Friday, 1. March 2002 09:40 schrieb Matthew Cline: > > Here's something that I'm currently trying out: make a list of mail user > > agents which are unlikely to be used for spam, and lower the hits for mail > > that matches. Here's what I currently have: > > The questio

Re: [SAtalk] rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS not working right

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Friday, 1. March 2002 11:23 schrieb Evert Jan van Ramselaar: > I have seen it getting triggered on a subject without any capital, > and on subjects with just one word in capitals. It's definitely not working with subjects using an asian charset, t

[SAtalk] suggestion don't put * * * S P A M * * * in subject

Hi   I suggest to user in this list do not put ***SPAM*** in the subject line.   I drop thes in a different map in my mail program and i think many other users.   Thanks   Sjaak  

[SAtalk] rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS not working right

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello list, I get the idea the rule SUBJ_ALL_CAPS is not working right in all situations. I have seen it getting triggered on a subject without any capital, and on subjects with just one word in capitals. Does someone else see the same behaviour?

  1   2   >