On Wednesday 17 July 2002 12:16, Carlos Kumbak wrote:
> Check out this:
> --
> Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED] by cadeado by uid X with
> qmail-scanner-1.12 (spamassassin: 2.40. . Clear:SA:1(14.2/5.0):. Processed
> in 0.683329 secs); 14 Jul 2002 03:16:03 -
> X-Spam-Sta
Hello
I'm trying to use SpamAssassin 2.31 with my Mail Server, but seems
that something is wrong.
Some SpamAssassin features are not working. The worst problem of all
is that even when SA identifies a SPAM it doesn't add the
`*SPAM*` to the subject. Also... the spam_level_stars doesn't
w
On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 19:08, Steve Wingate wrote:
> How can I set spamassasin to allow html mail? I seem to get the raw
> source instead. Believe it or not sometimes I actually like to see it.
After actually reading the previous posts, I hereby rescind my previous
question.
--
How can I set spamassasin to allow html mail? I seem to get the raw
source instead. Believe it or not sometimes I actually like to see it.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by: Jabber - The world's fastest growing
real-time communications
Ok. I am running RH 7.1, sendmail (8.12.5), spamassassin 2.31 (spamd
deamon), and spamass-milter.
I had a problem where the spamass-milter kept creating additional
deamons of both itself and spamc.
So, I go to the spamass web site, download the latest package (0.1.1),
apply the latest CVS file
Revised spamass-milter.cpp to pass "-u" "spamd" arguments to spamc.
This appears at least allow the mail to be filtered. However we now get a
slightly different flavor in the log:
spamd[1334]: Still running as root: user not specified, not found,
or set to root. Fall back to nobody.
Mil
spamd deposits the following:
spamd[1397]: Still running as root: user not specified, not found, or set
to root. Fall back to nobody.
and the mail appears to go through unmodified.
I tried creating a "spamd" user/group and start it with -u spamd and then I
get
spamc[1332]: connect() to spamd f
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 03:03:56PM -0700, Paul Bauer wrote:
> I have a question though. I am getting the following in a random
> timepattern.
This is really a razor-users question, not a SA-talk question, but ...
> 07/16-14:46:37.040427 192.168.1.133:2791 -> 194.109.217.74:7
> 07/16-14:46:37.23
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 12:34:14AM +0200, Ian Vännman wrote:
| Ok, I got a handle on the situation. But I still got a questions:
|
| When spamd receives a message from spamc does spamd spawn a new spamd
| process?
|
| I'm seeing that on my machine.
Yes, if by "spawn" you mean fork.
| I'm worri
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 03:39:40PM -0700, Kevin Gagel wrote:
> corrupted. What I mean is that there is somehow an extra line feed being
> attached. How do I tell spamc to use spamassassin's -F 0 option?
"-F 0" won't remove a line feed, but the answer to your question is--
you don't. You tell spa
Never mind. I was trying to get spamc to accept the paramater when spamd needed
it instead. All is working well now.
Kevin Gagel wrote:
>
> I've got another problem here. (no surprise eh!)
> Now that I am relaying from my anti-virus scanner to the SpamAssassin scanner to
> my mail server, and it
I've got another problem here. (no surprise eh!)
Now that I am relaying from my anti-virus scanner to the SpamAssassin scanner to
my mail server, and it's working... I am getting a prolem with the headers being
corrupted. What I mean is that there is somehow an extra line feed being
attached. How
Ok, I got a handle on the situation. But I still got a questions:
When spamd receives a message from spamc does spamd spawn a new spamd
process?
I'm seeing that on my machine.
I'm worried that for some reason spamc is not connecting to the spamd daemon
running, instead spamc spawns a new spamd
Better revision at line 128 add:
daemon(0, 1);
cout << PACKAGE << " " << VERSION << " demonized." << endl;
-Original Message-
From: Robert Strickler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 5:00 PM
To: 'Andre'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] RH 7.
I have installed SA and vipul's razor and must first start by saying
thanks. Product works great.
I have a question though. I am getting the following in a random
timepattern.
07/16-14:46:37.040427 192.168.1.133:2791 -> 194.109.217.74:7
07/16-14:46:37.231578 194.109.217.74:7 -> 192.168.1.133:
I run a Communigate Pro server on Mac OS X. Messages are passed to SA using
rules. Today it has been running into problems. It grew during the day and
culminated this night, when I had disable SpamAssassin out of the rules. It
had been running fine for more than a week until now...
If I activate
http://i.yak.net/twiki/bin/view/Fnord/SpamAssassinHowtoRedhat72#Get_spamass_
milter notes that
"spamass-sock doesn't deamonize itself"
Anybody want to team up to fix this? We really want to get this working. I
know there is a daemon(3). Although I am totally unfamiliar with c++, the
code does not
Thanks,
I had been making changes here but they were not being reflected in the emails.
I had an error in my script that caused spamc to not be launched... Its
corrected and all seems to be running now.
Thanks again.
Matt Kettler wrote:
>
> By default /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf is the pla
By default /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf is the place to go to make
site-wide changes.
You could also edit the files in /usr/share/spammassassin, but that's
probably not a good idea since they should be replaced when you upgrade.
At 02:06 PM 7/16/2002 -0700, Kevin Gagel wrote:
>Where exactl
I got the same problem with spamass-milter trying to run on a
Redhat7.1/Sendmail 8.12.5/amavisd-snapshot-200203 system. So I'm still using
the procmailrc solution.
- Original Message -
From: "SpamTalk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 5:57 PM
Su
Thanks for the quick reply and sorry about bothering the wrong list.
It is a simple spamc -> spamd via procmail and .forward, so the only
thing I could think of going wrong was procmail. I have upgraded to
3.22 to see if that helps.
--- Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Moving this bac
Where exactly is the config file that spamassassin uses on a site wide
configuration?
I'm using root as the run as and spamd as a daimen. Spam is called via a script.
Spamd is loaded with the -x to prohibit user configs. What directory would the
site config be in?
--
Kev
spamass-milter appears to return from its call to "smfi_register(smfilter)"
but does not seem to exit and hangs the boot sequence.
The "/etc/init.d/sa-milter start" script has:
daemon spamass-milter /var/run/sendmail/spamass.sock
"/etc/init.d/sa-milter start &" leaves the following proce
These two rules match every message that goes
through my system. Is there any known issues with them? I'm using SA
2.40.
Rob
(forgiving the ugly blue text HTML garbage)
From a little bit of TCPdumping it would appear that the client connects
to the outside servers on port 2702/tcp, with a random local port >1024
(typical of most client connections).
At 04:08 PM 7/16/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Oops, not what I am look
Are you blocking all outgoing ports?
If not, and you're only blocking incoming ports, then you might not need
to allow anything.
I have seen some mention of DCC, so you might want to make sure that the
ip_conntrack module is loaded for iptables.
On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Vince Puzzella wrote:
> O
Normally I wouldn't send something like this to a mailing list, but:
http://www.theonion.com/onion3825/anti-spam_legislation.html
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by: Jabber - The world's fastest growing
real-time communications platform!
Title: Message
Oops,
not what I am looking for
Can
anyone tell me what port(s) I need to allow in my firewall in order to get
Vipul's Razor to work?
Thanks.
v i n c e p u z z e l l a
s o f t w a r e d e v e l o p e
r http://bluecatnetworks.com
-Original Message-From: Vin
On 16 Jul 2002 the voices made Lance A. Brown write:
> > spamc < tempfile > tempfile
>
> Which will result in an empty 'tempfile' being sent to spamc under most
> shells. You need to redirect the output to a different file and then
> move it back to tempfile after spamc completes.
Sorry, I was
Moving this back to SA talk where it belongs.
I'd be very concerned that you might running mails through SA multiple
times and not just once, particularly with your comments about
SUBJ_HAS_Q_MARK. I think it's being run through SA once, being marked as
spam, defanged, then sometime later being
Title: Message
Never
mind. Did a "man spamd" and it told me 783 by default.
Thanks
anyway.
v i n c e p u z z e l l a
s o f t w a r e d e v e l o p e
r http://bluecatnetworks.com
-Original Message-From: Vince Puzzella
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:27 PMTo:
[EMAIL PROTECT
Title: razor port
Can anyone tell me what ports Vipul's Razor and DCC use by default? I have to configure my firewall accordingly.
Thanks.
v i n c e p u z z e l l a
s o f t w a r e d e v e l o p e r
http://bluecatnetworks.com
Tony,
I'm using DMail to launch the spamc, the dmail config line is:
message_process /usr/bin/spamc < $FILE > $FILE
It does not work, DMail only passes the value of $FILE for the output, not the
input. It passes the word "$FILE" to spamc so spamc sees /usr/bin/spamc < $FILE
> tempfilename
I guess
On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 14:40, Tony L. Svanstrom wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jul 2002 the voices made Kevin Gagel write:
>
> > MTA creates a temp file. I'm allowed to do anything with this file, so I launch
> > spamc and send it to spamd via a pipe. Ie: spamc < tempfile. Here is where I
> > have the proble
On Tue, 16 Jul 2002 the voices made Kevin Gagel write:
> MTA creates a temp file. I'm allowed to do anything with this file, so I launch
> spamc and send it to spamd via a pipe. Ie: spamc < tempfile. Here is where I
> have the problem. Is SA supposed to alter the temp file? or am I supposed to
>
I'm trying to get SA setup on a linux server with my MTA. I can't get the marked
up messages passed back though. Here is what happens.
MTA creates a temp file. I'm allowed to do anything with this file, so I launch
spamc and send it to spamd via a pipe. Ie: spamc < tempfile. Here is where I
have
At 7/16/02 6:16 AM, Steven Stringham wrote:
>A rule that says this "**" and not "**" means that I
>need one for everything in between?
No, the other way around; my example was:
header contains "*" AND header does not contain "**"
That would match anything that cont
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Said Matt Kettler on Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 01:07:09AM -0400:
> I don't think SpamAssassin will do what you want. Even the
> blacklisting feature only forces the email to have it's subject
> modified. In fact, the primary purpose SpamAssassin serves in
As for modifying SA, I have already done it, (at least initially). I
just want help to modify it to allow the parameters to be in a central
config file.
A rule that says this "**" and not "**" means that I
need one for everything in between? The stars are also in the header,
for
Attached spam message scored only 2.31 with pretty much default installation
(spamd running with -L switch). None of the unsubscribe/lame excuse rules triggered.
I think the following changes should be made:
body EXCUSE_1 /\b(?:You (?:were sent|have received|are
receiving
Hi,
> If I put a spamc (or spamassasin) call in /etc/procmailrc (and
> procmail is my MDA in sendmail), will SA look for user confs based on
> the intended recipient? I think the answer is no, but I want to be
> sure.
Unless you DROPPRIV=yes or you use -u $LOGNAME, it will not use the
user pre
I just set up MIMEDefang on my system, set up as a sendmail milter, calling f-prot
and SpamAssassin.
I don't see how it would be possible for SpamAssassin to use any user preferences,
such as whitelist_from or all_spam_to, since SA gets called so early in the process.
Is it true that this type o
> 1) the /etc/init.d/spamassassin script never seems to get launched on
> startup
> is there something else needed?
Yes. There needs to be a symlink to the appropriate run level
directory of /etc/rc.d/rc2.d/S90spamassassin or similar. On RH
systems that is usually placed by the 'chkconfig
43 matches
Mail list logo
