On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 the voices made Craig R Hughes write:
> Rob McMillin wrote:
>
> RM> His approach is good but inadequate already. The "European Girls" spam
> RM> includes random data to evade just such tests. I wonder if he has a way
> RM> around this?
>
> Yes, he does. Read in the razor arch
Rob McMillin wrote:
RM> His approach is good but inadequate already. The "European Girls" spam
RM> includes random data to evade just such tests. I wonder if he has a way
RM> around this?
Yes, he does. Read in the razor archives about "ephemeral hashes". I think his
bigger problem will be c
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Rob McMillin wrote:
> Jay Jacobs wrote:
>
>>Every once in a while (I'd say maybe 2 or 3 times a week), I get a
>>header chopped in two, I assume on the Second From field. Sometimes
>>it's spam, sometimes not. I just pipe the email through SA, with the
>>-P and -F0, without th
dman wrote:
d> Can the private class-C be excluded from the NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP test?
Yes, no traces of https?://10\. in the spam corpus.
Send me a patch and I'll apply.
C
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge
On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, dman wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:58:37PM -0700, Rob McMillin wrote:
> | Jay Jacobs wrote:
> |
> | >Every once in a while (I'd say maybe 2 or 3 times a week), I get a header
> | >chopped in two.
> | >Anyone else seen this?
> |
> | Yes, and usually it's due to a lockin
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:58:37PM -0700, Rob McMillin wrote:
| Jay Jacobs wrote:
|
| >Every once in a while (I'd say maybe 2 or 3 times a week), I get a header
| >chopped in two, I assume on the Second From field. Sometimes it's spam,
| >sometimes not. I just pipe the email through SA, with th
Sidney Markowitz wrote:
>On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 17:04, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
>
>>It feels to me like the kind of thing a reporter would
>>get wrong while being taken in by an business
>>man's self promotion.
>>
>
>I asked Vipul on the Razor mailing list and it turns out that my
>intuition was wr
Jay Jacobs wrote:
>Every once in a while (I'd say maybe 2 or 3 times a week), I get a header
>chopped in two, I assume on the Second From field. Sometimes it's spam,
>sometimes not. I just pipe the email through SA, with the -P and -F0,
>without the -F0 it was really screwed up... also using qm
Every once in a while (I'd say maybe 2 or 3 times a week), I get a header
chopped in two, I assume on the Second From field. Sometimes it's spam,
sometimes not. I just pipe the email through SA, with the -P and -F0,
without the -F0 it was really screwed up... also using qmail.
Anyone else seen
Can the private class-C be excluded from the NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP test?
I just had two non-spam messages tagged, and that test (scored 2.5)
easily pushed it over the threshold (just 1.3 over). These particular
messages included an ip-literal url in the body, but it is a private
address and is part
On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Lars Hansson wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 15:43:36 -0400
> "Duncan Findlay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Simply put, it's not free software.
>
> Uh, says who?
Depends on the value of free. qmail doesn't meet the Debian Free
Software Guidelines, nor is it FSF "free".
> Let
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 15:43:36 -0400
"Duncan Findlay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simply put, it's not free software.
Uh, says who?
Lets see, you dont have to pay for it, you get the source, you can modify the source
and you can distribute your modifications/patches.
Sounds free to me.
--
Lars
Ok, after a storm of closing bugs in the last day or two, I think we're ready
now to run the GA, then release. Could nonspam.log submitters please do a cvs
update and run mass-check, then submit? Please let me know if you're going to
submit when you expect the submission to happen, or if you'
On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 17:04, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> It feels to me like the kind of thing a reporter would
> get wrong while being taken in by an business
> man's self promotion.
I asked Vipul on the Razor mailing list and it turns out that my
intuition was wrong -- Vipul did co-found Cloudmar
Package: spamassassin
Version: 2.11-1
Severity: wishlist
(those headers for debian bts)
This only hit 4.1 so the default threshold of 5.0 wouldn't have taggged
it, however it's a high score for a non-spam.
Something like (MS|CA|IN)[- ]?\d+ in a subject line should probably
have a -ve score...
On 11 Apr 2002 at 9:33, Robert Covell wrote:
> Where does Spamassassin look for config files when used with Mimedefang? I
> want to add domains to the whitelist but have add zero luck in getting
> Spamassassin to pick up any of the addresses. I have tried to put them
> everywhere using various
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 05:46:01PM -0400, Jeff wrote:
> This was working before I updated RH 7.2 with the new errata for glibc
> Here is a test with both using the sample on the command linenote the
> lack of SPAM in the output of the first one.just returns without
> tagging.
>
> [root@th
> Pipe a message to spamc. Eg :
>
> cat message.rfc822 | spamc
>
> Verify that you get the message back. The easiest way to see if the
> message was tagged as spam or not is
>
> cat message.rfc822 | spamc | grep -i spam
Ok, I did it and it still did not get tagged. It just passed th
For some odd reason I had spamc not working and I finally track it down to
the spamd start up script for RH7.2 I used the line:
daemon spamd -d -F0
in the start) switch statement it seems to fix my problems, which is rather
odd because the school's server has the same configuration and OS, a
> Here we even have a little action from the spamd on localhost but no
> usual entry in the syslog for clean message or identified spam. I used
> to get this when you updated perl with CPAN instead of the RH rpms but
> this was working with 5.6.1. Please take note that this behavior has
> happen
> Is the message by any chance larger than 250k? If so then spamc will
> pass it through unchanged. You can control the threshold with spamc's
> '-s' flag.
No, these are just small test messages.
--
Chuck Wolber
System Administrator
AltaServ Corporation
(425)576-1202
ten.vresatla@wkcuhc
This was working before I updated RH 7.2 with the new errata for glibc
Here is a test with both using the sample on the command linenote the
lack of SPAM in the output of the first one.just returns without
tagging.
[root@the-techy spamassassin-2.11]# cat sample-spam.txt | /usr/bin/spamc |
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> On Thursday 11 Apr 2002 5:21 pm, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> > I'm trying to get some numbers on number of pieces of spam, numbers of
> > spammers, etc.. Are there any good references I could use?
>
> About 20% of the email we see is spam. That's on a pe
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 01:16:13PM -0700, Chuck Wolber wrote:
| > You can also verify that spamc works from the command line.
|
| I also tried that too. I was able to connect, which seemed to be ok. I
| also replaced spamc with a cheesy shell script that would output a line
| into a file ever
Chuck Wolber wrote:
CW> > For this problem, define "not working"... Do incoming mails have the
CW> > X-Spam-Status header included? Is the # of hits set to 0.0?
CW>
CW> No, no X-Spam-Status header or anything. Looking at the headers and body
CW> of the incoming messages, there is no indicatio
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
TVD> For this problem, define "not working"... Do incoming mails have the
TVD> X-Spam-Status header included? Is the # of hits set to 0.0?
TVD>
TVD> If the header is there, I would look at permission issues with spamd.
TVD>
TVD> If the header isn't there, I would assume
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 03:58:31PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 03:36:33PM -0400, Elie Rosenblum wrote:
> > Shouldn't this be :0fbw? Otherwise it doesn't filter the body,
> > just the header.
> >
> > (I generally specify :0fhbw, just so it's clear what I intend)
>
> pr
> I use /usr/bin/spamc in my RH system. The procmailrc man page seems to
> say that the explicit /usr/bin is not necessary, as it is in the default
> PATH, but that's the obvious difference.
I tried that, but thanks for the suggestion.
> You can also verify that spamc works from the command l
> For this problem, define "not working"... Do incoming mails have the
> X-Spam-Status header included? Is the # of hits set to 0.0?
No, no X-Spam-Status header or anything. Looking at the headers and body
of the incoming messages, there is no indication that spamassassin did
anything to th
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 03:36:33PM -0400, Elie Rosenblum wrote:
> Shouldn't this be :0fbw? Otherwise it doesn't filter the body,
> just the header.
>
> (I generally specify :0fhbw, just so it's clear what I intend)
procmail defaults to hb. :0fW is all you need. (w or W actually,
depending on wh
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 12:09, Chuck Wolber wrote:
> :0fw
> | spamc
>
> It turns out that no mail gets reported that way. When I alter the
> procmail rule to the following:
>
> :0fw
> | /usr/bin/spamassassin -P
>
> Mail is reported just fine.
I use /usr/bin/spamc in my RH system. The procmailrc
> > It is. It's just only in there as source, not a binary.
> >
> any takers as to why it's only there as source?
> --
> Duncan Findlay
>
I believe its because of the qmail licensing. You can distribute source
freely but not precompiled binaries.
--
Ed.
__
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 03:03:57PM -0400, Dave Weiner wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 05:45:04PM +0100, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > > On Thursday 11 Apr 2002 5:37 pm, dman wrote:
> > > > any takers as to why qmail isn't in debian?
> > >
> > > It is. It's just only in there as source, not a binary.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 12:09:01PM -0700, Chuck Wolber wrote:
> System:
> RH7.1 all RH updates applied.
> Sendmail 8.11.6 (stock, no tweaks except a different RBL)
> Razor 1.19
> Spamassassin Latest Stable
> procmail-3.21-0.71
>
>
> I start spamd as normal (with the RH startup script) and then r
I just noticed this as well. I think that, since I have several boxes using
spamc that no longer return any spam identification after the new 2.2.4-24
glibc was added that this C library change may be the culprit? Anyone else
experience this?
- Original Message -
From: "Chuck Wolber" <[EM
System:
RH7.1 all RH updates applied.
Sendmail 8.11.6 (stock, no tweaks except a different RBL)
Razor 1.19
Spamassassin Latest Stable
procmail-3.21-0.71
I start spamd as normal (with the RH startup script) and then run spamc
with the following procmail rule from /etc/procmailrc
:0fw
| spamc
> If I remember correctly, DJB won't allow it to be distributed as a binary,
> unless it contains his *exact* specifications -- Not "adjusted" to fit the
> packager's hierarchy. So most packagers don't bother.
In fact, here's his rant on the subject: http://cr.yp.to/compatibility.html
and http:/
If I remember correctly, DJB won't allow it to be distributed as a binary,
unless it contains his *exact* specifications -- Not "adjusted" to fit the
packager's hierarchy. So most packagers don't bother.
rOD.
--
"Three prawns are hardly a galaxy!"
___
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 05:45:04PM +0100, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > On Thursday 11 Apr 2002 5:37 pm, dman wrote:
> > > any takers as to why qmail isn't in debian?
> >
> > It is. It's just only in there as source, not a binary.
> >
> any takers as to why it's only there as source?
That one is eas
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 05:45:04PM +0100, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> On Thursday 11 Apr 2002 5:37 pm, dman wrote:
> > any takers as to why qmail isn't in debian?
>
> It is. It's just only in there as source, not a binary.
>
any takers as to why it's only there as source?
--
Duncan Findlay
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 01:06:58PM -0400, Mike Black wrote:
| On further examination it looks like spamc is the culprit.
No it isn't. Read the bug report again.
| Doing and strace shows spamc is blocked on a write...
Of course it is. If milter would do a read() then spamc's write()
wouldn't b
On further examination it looks like spamc is the culprit.
Doing and strace shows spamc is blocked on a write...
write(1, "r-Encoding: base64\r\nContent-Disp"..., 252928
Michael D. Black Principal Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 321-676-2923,x203
http://www
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 the voices made Matt Sergeant write:
> On Thursday 11 Apr 2002 5:21 pm, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> > I'm trying to get some numbers on number of pieces of spam, numbers of
> > spammers, etc.. Are there any good references I could use?
>
> About 20% of the email we see is spam
"Eric S. Johansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm trying to get some numbers on number of pieces of spam, numbers
> of spammers, etc.. Are there any good references I could use?
I don't have a lot of data for the general community, but in terms of
the mail I receive you can look at:
http:/
> On Thu Apr 11 at 05:25:49 PM, Matt Sergeant wrote:
>
> > Wouldn't we be better off sticking a sparc linux install disk image in the
> > contrib directory for SunOS users? ;-)
An iMac with every 2'500 USD license of SA? ;-)
/Tony
--
# Per scientiam ad libertatem! // Through knowledge
On Thursday 11 Apr 2002 5:37 pm, dman wrote:
> any takers as to why qmail isn't in debian?
It is. It's just only in there as source, not a binary.
--
Matt.
<:->get a SMart net
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourcef
On Thu Apr 11 at 05:25:49 PM, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Wouldn't we be better off sticking a sparc linux install disk image in the
> contrib directory for SunOS users? ;-)
Gross! Stop that!
sean
--
Sean Harding [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "No one can save us
http://www.dogcow.org/sean/ | but Ki
On Thursday 11 Apr 2002 5:21 pm, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> I'm trying to get some numbers on number of pieces of spam, numbers of
> spammers, etc.. Are there any good references I could use?
About 20% of the email we see is spam. That's on a per-email basis though. On
a bandwidth basis it's ab
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 03:54:20PM -0500, Nick Bellomy wrote:
| What do you guys recommend as the base MTA - I've seen
| posts from several people regarding qmail/qscanner setups and have
| noticed some exim setups in the mix as well. Does anyone have
| experience with both and want to comment on
On Thursday 11 Apr 2002 5:12 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Tim Steele wrote:
>
> TS> The problem is that snprintf doesn't exist. If you borrow this from
> another TS> source and link it in then it works.
> TS>
> TS> It would be nice if this could be fixed in a future version.
>
> I've just added sn
Daniel Rogers wrote:
DR> Is this perhaps a case of
DR> http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=118 ?
Time to rename that one the "Michael _color_" bug.
C
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lis
Mike Black wrote:
MB> If I the message "skipping" shows up in the log then spamass-milter
MB> stays running. It apparently times out after a while and sends the
MB> attachment anyway -- however...the clients don't think the email was sent
MB> and keep trying. So you end up getting multiple
I'm trying to get some numbers on number of pieces of spam, numbers of
spammers, etc.. Are there any good references I could use?
---eric
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-
Bart Schaefer wrote:
BS> Latest CVS has:
BS>
BS> +body INCREASE_EJACULATION /increase ejaculation/i
BS> +describe INCREASE_EJACULATION Offers increased ejaculation possibilities
BS>
BS> And also:
BS>
BS> +body EJACULATION/(?:increase|improve).{0,10}ejaculation/i
BS> +desc
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:04:27AM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Mike, I don't understand what you mean by "large attachments are blocking", or
> by the stuff in parentheses. Could you clarify if I don't answer below?
Is this perhaps a case of
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1
If I the message "skipping" shows up in the log then spamass-milter
stays running. It apparently times out after a while and sends the
attachment anyway -- however...the clients don't think the email was sent
and keep trying. So you end up getting multiple copies of the attachments.
I had to
Robert Covell wrote:
RC> Where does Spamassassin look for config files when used with Mimedefang? I
RC> want to add domains to the whitelist but have add zero luck in getting
RC> Spamassassin to pick up any of the addresses. I have tried to put them
RC> everywhere using various names:
RC>
RC>
Tim Steele wrote:
TS> The problem is that snprintf doesn't exist. If you borrow this from another
TS> source and link it in then it works.
TS>
TS> It would be nice if this could be fixed in a future version.
I've just added snp.tar.gz to the contrib/ folder and pointed to it from the
README f
Mike Black wrote:
MB> I've just installed spamassassin with sendmail-8.12.3 and spamass-milter-0.1.1 and
large attachments are blocking (they actually end up sending the attachment on every
attempt by the client -- but the client (both Outlook Express and Outlook) timeout and
spamass-milter pr
Lars Hansson wrote:
LH> Heh, I can hear the "my-MTA-is-better-than-your-MTA" flame fest coming...:P
People seem quite irreligious about mail systems in my experience; certainly
less religious than OS views or text editors :)
C
___
Spamassassin-talk
Title: User_prefs location
Per
user preferences go in ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs. Site wide preferences
are typically stored in /etc/mail/spamassass/local.cf
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Andy
GramataSent: Thursday, April
Latest CVS has:
+body INCREASE_EJACULATION /increase ejaculation/i
+describe INCREASE_EJACULATION Offers increased ejaculation possibilities
And also:
+body EJACULATION/(?:increase|improve).{0,10}ejaculation/i
+describe EJACULATIONIncrease your ejaculation!
Title: User_prefs location
Hello,
I've got spamassassin running fine, but I'm wondering where is the correct location for the user_prefs file?(assuming this is where I add my whitelist entries) I have a few domains that I need to whitelist and I cant find in any of the SA docs where this fi
The problem is that snprintf doesn't exist. If you borrow this from another
source and link it in then it works.
It would be nice if this could be fixed in a future version.
Tim
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sour
Where does Spamassassin look for config files when used with Mimedefang? I
want to add domains to the whitelist but have add zero luck in getting
Spamassassin to pick up any of the addresses. I have tried to put them
everywhere using various names:
60_whitelist.cf
local.cf
spamassassin.cf
/usr
The problem is that snprintf doesn't exist. If you borrow this from another
source and link it in then it works.
It would be nice if this could be fixed in a future version.
Tim
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sour
> Qmail + qmailqueue patch + tls patch
> qmail-scanner + sophie/sophos
> spamd/spamc
>
I ditto this. This system is very similar to mine and it just plain works!
Very little day to day maintenence.
---
Ed.
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL
> hi,
>
> I've been using spamassassin for a few weeks and
> am pretty happy with it. My setup is with
> spamc/spamd. Some users however would prefer to be
> able to see the HTML (in case) for readability. Is
> there any option for this?
>
> thanks
>
> --
> Ivan Ivanyi
>
You will find your a
I've just installed spamassassin with sendmail-8.12.3 and
spamass-milter-0.1.1 and large attachments are blocking (they actually end up
sending the attachment on every attempt by the client -- but the client
(both Outlook Express and Outlook) timeout and spamass-milter processes keep
On Wednesday 10 Apr 2002 9:54 pm, Nick Bellomy wrote:
> I've been tasked with creating an antispam/antivirus box to be placed in
> front of our mailserver. The goal is to have the box act as primary MX,
> scan messages (antivirus, spamassassin, and DCC), deliver "grey" mail to
> a local mailbox/m
Heh, I can hear the "my-MTA-is-better-than-your-MTA" flame fest coming...:P
For reference, here's what we're using:
Dell Poweredge 1500's
OpenBSD 2.9
Qmail + qmailqueue patch + tls patch
qmail-scanner + sophie/sophos
spamd/spamc
"Tis working mighty fine. Can't vouch for any other MTA's but I'm s
hi,
I've been using spamassassin for a few weeks and
am pretty happy with it. My setup is with
spamc/spamd. Some users however would prefer to be
able to see the HTML (in case) for readability. Is
there any option for this?
thanks
--
Ivan Ivanyi
Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics
1, rue Mi
72 matches
Mail list logo
