On Friday 12 July 2002 10:51 pm, mark wrote:
> The SpamAssassin help file lists some information about installing
> dccproc for spam testing.
> Is there a way to tell if and how well the dcc tests are working?
Add "dcc_add_header 1" to your user_prefs or local.cf file; then spam going
through SA
The SpamAssassin help file lists some information about installing
dccproc for spam testing.
Is there a way to tell if and how well the dcc tests are working?
I'm very new to dcc testing (and spam testing, too, for that matter) but
wondered how dccproc was doing its job.
When I receive spammed ma
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
> | spamc runs as the user. It appears that the user's user_prefs file
> | is read (hence its entry in the header) but the message is processed
> | as root, using root's user_prefs file.
>
> That is sure to happen if
> 1) spamc is run as ro
> One thing is that the "read the archives" link to sa-talk takes you to the
> searchable SourceForge mailing list interface (described as "beta" by SF)
> whereas the other links point to the nearly-useless Geocrawler archives.
> If things are going to get "dressed up" let's point them *all* at th
The report below does not list a razor lookup. Any reason why that may have not
been done. I do a "--pipe -x -F 0" for my switches for processing. Maybe I
need a config or something?
SPAM: Start SpamAssassin results --
SPAM: This mail is probably spam.
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Hope nobody that admins domains etc. is dumping without looking at teh
> > messages. My VeriSign Renewal notice got nailed as spam.
>
> The default config for a long time, now in 60_whitelist.cf, has had
> the following.
>
> whitelist_from [EMAIL P
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 04:27:54PM -0700, Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
>Hope nobody that admins domains etc. is dumping without looking at teh
>messages. My VeriSign Renewal notice got nailed as spam.
So did mine -- but given that we've moved all our domains to netwiz, that's
exactly where they
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 04:00:43PM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
| BTW my position on this, FWIW, is to take the old IETF position: "be
| conservative in what you send, and liberal in what you receive".
Doesn't that kind of imply accepting all the spam and whatever other
junk is thrown at you?
It
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 01:19:11PM -0700, Bob Sully wrote:
| The problem appears to be that spamd runs as root...
This is necessary so that it can setuid() to the proper user.
| spamc runs as the user. It appears that the user's user_prefs file
| is read (hence its entry in the header) but the
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 06:34:00PM -0700, Brandon Knitter wrote:
| Did I read something about a spamd process that the spamassassin client (perhaps
| a this client) can talk to? If so, am I to assume that this thin client would
| send the mail to spamd and spamd would send back the results. Mean
Did I read something about a spamd process that the spamassassin client (perhaps
a this client) can talk to? If so, am I to assume that this thin client would
send the mail to spamd and spamd would send back the results. Meaning that I
could have REALLY light weight mail machines which send the
D wrote:
> and whitelist all the forged spam.
>
> I hate whitelists, unless they're based on unforgeable data (eg valid
> GPG signature).
On that idea I have been wondering if it might be possible to add
signing by the mailer list manager. Majordomo, mailman, etc. could
sign the message that it
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 07:07:31PM -0500, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
> | I haven't chopped out the delivery stuff altogether, but have been
> | sorely tempted to.
>
> Do it! Do it!
I'm hoping to get a patch ready this evening. :) Although there still
needs to be a bug put in about it.
> You
> Hope nobody that admins domains etc. is dumping without looking at teh
> messages. My VeriSign Renewal notice got nailed as spam.
The default config for a long time, now in 60_whitelist.cf, has had
the following.
whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What address was your renewal from? Same o
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 02:50:00PM -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
| On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Mike Burger wrote:
|
| =>You could put yahoo.com and hotmail.com into your whitelist.
and whitelist all the forged spam.
I hate whitelists, unless they're based on unforgeable data (eg valid
GPG signature).
|
Odd...mine didn't.
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
> Hope nobody that admins domains etc. is dumping without looking at teh
> messages. My VeriSign Renewal notice got nailed as spam.
>
> Of course someone will tell me to upgrade (good idea) or this was
> discussed before I go
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 09:12:17AM -0700, Craig R. Hughes wrote:
| I've long been of the philosophy that spamassassin should focus
| on exactly one thing: identification and tagging of spam.
YES!
| Leave the delivery to something which does delivery well.
YES!
| Leave the SMTP to something wh
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 12:04:11PM -0700, Marsha Hanchrow wrote:
| A few more examples of tests that should be fine tuned or looked at
| suspiciously:
|
| This is (part of) a completely legitimate note, from someone who couldn't
| forge a "received" header if her life depended on it. I've rece
At 07/12/2002 15:12, Collins, Elizabeth wrote:
>Howdy,
>
> I am new to SpamAssassin but I recently inherited the company wide spam
>filtering stuff. I have been expirimenting w/ my own rules. I like to
>leave the stock rules files as they are, but I want to change some of the
>rules therein.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 08:44:40AM -0700, Steven Stringham wrote:
| I am however, concerned with letting valid emails through (we are a Law
| Firm). If I were to kill valid messages, there would be real problems.
Just a note, you're not supposed to drop mail in the first place.
Either accept it
Hope nobody that admins domains etc. is dumping without looking at teh
messages. My VeriSign Renewal notice got nailed as spam.
Of course someone will tell me to upgrade (good idea) or this was
discussed before I got on the list 8-( a two week trial as sourceforge
list mail - mailman - was taki
Howdy,
I am new to SpamAssassin but I recently inherited the company wide spam
filtering stuff. I have been expirimenting w/ my own rules. I like to
leave the stock rules files as they are, but I want to change some of the
rules therein. I have discovered that if you say: score MYRULE 4.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 03:11:20PM +1000, Chris Goh wrote:
| Hi all,
|
| I've been trying to work out one things but seem to not have enough
| of a clue to get anywhere. I can briefly describe this problem I am
| having as 'problem with filtering using user prefs when dealing with
| an alia
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 02:55:59PM +0930, Willie Twonk wrote:
| I am looking to set up a simple relay host to run SpamAssassin on using
| RH7.3
|
| If possible, I would like to avoid any additional processing, eg not use
| MailScanner, mimedefang etc.
sa-exim can easily do that.
http://marc.me
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 09:00:41PM -0500, Bill Omer wrote:
| Is there a way that I can delete high scoring spam with
| spamass-milter/spamd (without procmail)?
Read the sendmail docs and see if it provides a way. (with a
Turing-complete config language I would be surprised if it couldn't)
SA it
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Brandon Knitter wrote:
> Quoting Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > One of these days, someone should really fix that page so links all four
> > mailing lists (saTalk, saAnnounce, saDev and saSightings) are all in a
> > uniform form format and it's obvious there are 4
Quoting Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Actually, it is listed on the web page at SF and it is the first mailing
> list for SpamAssassin listed. Unfortunately the link to SAtalk is not laid
> out in the same format as the other lists, so a quick visual scan tends to
> cause people to "skip
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 01:57:42PM -0400, Ryan Cleary wrote:
> "ensure that this line is stripped"
Ok, I think it's time to send in a patch that gets rid of this stuff
once and for all. Let your delivery agent figure out about dealing with
the From.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"A committee
Actually, it is listed on the web page at SF and it is the first mailing
list for SpamAssassin listed. Unfortunately the link to SAtalk is not laid
out in the same format as the other lists, so a quick visual scan tends to
cause people to "skip past" it as being "header garbage text". Look
clo
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 09:09:39AM -0700, Craig R. Hughes wrote:
>
> That's probably illegal in a lot of jurisdictions.
Probably so. Perhaps I need to put an "acceptable use policy" on my web
site. I can warn them in advance that if they violate it, I won't be
bashful about responding.
Jeremy
A few more examples of tests that should be fine tuned or looked at
suspiciously:
This is (part of) a completely legitimate note, from someone who couldn't
forge a "received" header if her life depended on it.
I've received a number of legitimate notes that tripped the
"RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM" te
At 08:44 7/12/2002 -0700 Steven Stringham wrote:
>I am looking to filter my entire domain's email through SpamAssassin.
>Sendmail + spamass-milter.
>
>I am however, concerned with letting valid emails through (we are a Law
>Firm). If I were to kill valid messages, there would be real problems.
>
>
Hi.
I'm having some trouble installing qmail-scanner so that I can use
spamassassin system wide on a qmail server.
When I'm running ./configure from qmail-scanner, it shows:
Something like the SpamAssassin spamc is present, but not working - ignoring...
Something like the SpamAssassin spamc is
> The solution: Change the way it reports on the subject line, and let it
> all through.
That's how I handle most of my stuff...
> In PerMsgStatus.pm (which is where the subject line is changed) I am
> adding two additional variables: _SPLV_ and _SPLG_.
> Spamlevel = hits/threshold (so hits of 1
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 11:48:13AM -0700, Brandon Knitter wrote:
> > [ What's the -talk mailing list? I don't see it listed at SF ]
>
> Talk is for people discussing spamassassin, how they use it, etc.
> Think of it as a "users" list.
*swap*
> I switched this thread from devel to talk since it
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 01:43:05PM -0500, Smart, Dan wrote:
> I didn't install IP-Tables / Linux Firewall when setting up my mail server
> concerned about a performance hit. I have since reconsidered, as this would
> beef up security. Is there any issue with running a local firewall on the
> mai
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 11:48:13AM -0700, Brandon Knitter wrote:
> [ What's the -talk mailing list? I don't see it listed at SF ]
Talk is for people discussing spamassassin, how they use it, etc.
Think of it as a "users" list.
"devel" is for the developers to discuss more of the behind-the-scen
I'm running a dedicated iptables firewall in front of my server, as well
as running iptables directly on the server, itself.
While this server doesn't necessarily take the heaviest load that a server
can take, it gets its share of mail, and I don't think it's seeing any
performance issues.
On
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 01:43:05PM -0500, Smart, Dan wrote:
> beef up security. Is there any issue with running a local firewall on the
> mail / SA gateway. I know I need to worry about the DCC / razor protocols.
In and of itself, there's no problem, that's how my mail server is
setup. There m
There we go. Funny, I *just* figured that out as you were replying! :)
Thanks...assassinating I do go! :-D
[ What's the -talk mailing list? I don't see it listed at SF ]
--
-bk
Quoting Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 11:40:48AM -0700, Brandon Knitter wrote:
>
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 11:40:48AM -0700, Brandon Knitter wrote:
> So it looks like it is adding the "From..." part at the top. What is that?
> That's not a valid header!
It's an mbox format message seperator. SA generates them by default.
If you don't want/can't have them for your setup, add
I didn't install IP-Tables / Linux Firewall when setting up my mail server
concerned about a performance hit. I have since reconsidered, as this would
beef up security. Is there any issue with running a local firewall on the
mail / SA gateway. I know I need to worry about the DCC / razor protoc
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> I found this out by changing the spamd options to have a "-F 0".
> spamc gets called during procmail which promptly puts messages w/out
> "From " lines in the last message of my inbox.
I think spamassassin is stripping the From lines. From spamassas
Hello erveryone, I just installed SA in my Redhat/Sendmail8.12.5/amavisd
system and it's working fine.
The thing is, since I'm form Brazil, I would like to add my own rules and
scores to catch Portuguese-Brazilian SPAM.
I tried to play with some of the .cf files in /etc/mail/spamassassin but the
m
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 01:17:29PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Although in thinking about it, people don't really use SA for delivery
> any more, so we should probably just not add the From line and let
> procmail (or insert your favorite program here) handle the From line.
> Not my call thoug
This is a first step into implementing a solution.
This allows my users to quickly scan, and build rules to kill them or
put them into a folder for evaluation when they have time. We need to
make sure the rules work with our clients and legitimate emails before
we start killing emails at the gat
"Craig R.Hughes" said:
> I've long been of the philosophy that spamassassin should focus
> on exactly one thing: identification and tagging of spam. Leave
> the delivery to something which does delivery well. Leave the
> SMTP to something which does SMTP well. etc, etc, etc. I
> haven't
On Friday, July 12, 2002, at 02:05 AM, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Andre Bonhote wrote:
>> Hi SA-folks!
>> This just dropped in this morning and got -0.3 hits. There might be
>> something wrong somewhere.
>
>
>> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.3 required=4.0
>> tests=DEAR_SOMEBODY,US_DOLLARS_2 version=2
I've long been of the philosophy that spamassassin should focus
on exactly one thing: identification and tagging of spam. Leave
the delivery to something which does delivery well. Leave the
SMTP to something which does SMTP well. etc, etc, etc. I
haven't chopped out the delivery stuff alto
That's probably illegal in a lot of jurisdictions.
C
On Thursday, July 11, 2002, at 04:13 PM, Jeremy Zawodny wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 01:34:19PM -0600, Mike Diehl wrote:
>>
>> The other day, I got this little jewel in my e-mail. So I
>> decided to have a
>> little fun. I sent a repl
I am looking to filter my entire domain's email through SpamAssassin.
Sendmail + spamass-milter.
I am however, concerned with letting valid emails through (we are a Law
Firm). If I were to kill valid messages, there would be real problems.
The solution: Change the way it reports on the subject
Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.3 required=4.0 tests=DEAR_SOMEBODY,US_DOLLARS_2
>version=2.20
>
> SpamAssassin is time-dependant software. It is not, and will never be
> "install and forget" software. You need to upgrade.
SA 2.31 tells me
tests=DEAR_SOMEBODY,US_DOL
I read that article. It seems to me the author doesn't understand
mailing lists, nor does she understand that many people have
"vanity" email addresses hosted at their ISP's. Both of these
situations will most likely have different sender and "From" address
and are 100% ligitimate. It is a bad
Also, you should submit that e-mail to:
> --
> From: Andre Bonhote[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 1:10 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Not caught: Luis Boma $30M
>
> <>
> Hi SA-folks!
>
> This just dropped in this morning and
(sorry, I wasn't finished yet.)
You should also forward that attached e-mail to:
http://home.rica.net/alphae/419coal/
- mark
> --
> From: Andre Bonhote[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 1:10 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] N
Andre Bonhote wrote:
> Hi SA-folks!
>
> This just dropped in this morning and got -0.3 hits. There might be
> something wrong somewhere.
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.3 required=4.0 tests=DEAR_SOMEBODY,US_DOLLARS_2
>version=2.20
SpamAssassin is time-dependant software. It is not, and will neve
Hi Oliver
Your first hint worked out for me ! Thanks.
This required the conditions in the amavis and spamassassin directors to change
though.
( the amavis condition changed to )
condition = "${if or{ {eq {$received_protocol}{scanned-ok}} {eq
{$received_protocol}{spam-scanned}} } {0}{1}}"
(
57 matches
Mail list logo
