On Wednesday, July 17, 2002, at 06:51 , Kenneth Porter wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 16:10, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
>> Very nice!
>>
>> On my website [1] I have a public e-mail address which is created every
>> time
>> you visit a page and contains date, time and IP of the visit. Now,
>> final
--On Wednesday, July 17, 2002 3:22 PM +0200 Carlo Borelli
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is rumoured to have written:
> I'm using spamd in daemon mode with vpopmail: daemon spamd -d -v -u
> vpopmail -F 0
> What's the exact sintax forcing to read one configuration and not in the
> vpopmail users own maildir
On Wednesday 17 July 2002 20:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It *is* faster than spamd, tho - when I was using spamc/spamd, it would
> take 30+ seconds to scan; amavisd-new does it in like 3 or 4.
Something must be wrong with your installation or setup.
My average time for a scan is ~4 seconds and
On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 23:28, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> >It *is* faster than spamd, tho - when I was using spamc/spamd, it would
> >take 30+ seconds to scan; amavisd-new does it in like 3 or 4.
>
> It should be, AFAIR, it disable RBL check that takes some time (if nop
> CPU resources).
I already ha
Hi,
I'm currently trying to use the load_scoreonly_sql cmd in a perl script
to retreive a score from a mysql database for a user.
However when I execute the script, I get a blank score. The script does
take about 5-10 seconds for it to send back a blank, so I'm lead to
believe that it is communi
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> >It *is* faster than spamd, tho - when I was using spamc/spamd, it would
> >take 30+ seconds to scan; amavisd-new does it in like 3 or 4.
>
> It should be, AFAIR, it disable RBL check that takes some time (if nop
> CPU resources).
I'm finding the delay
>It *is* faster than spamd, tho - when I was using spamc/spamd, it would
>take 30+ seconds to scan; amavisd-new does it in like 3 or 4.
It should be, AFAIR, it disable RBL check that takes some time (if nop
CPU resources).
Olivier
---
This sf
On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 16:10, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> Very nice!
>
> On my website [1] I have a public e-mail address which is created every time
> you visit a page and contains date, time and IP of the visit. Now, finally,
> I got some spam on some of those dummy addresses.
Cool! Can you shar
> [3] gives 209.47.59.145 for the second IP.
>
> The first one is owned by Rogers@Home Canada ([4], [5]), the second by
> UUnet Canada ([6]).
Damn that's awful close to the C I own from UUnet (209.47.196.0/24)
> So far, so good. I've got everything I need to report an abuse. Anything I
> should
Following the instructions on the spamassassin website it says to use
the -r and -w options to automatically report it and send a message back
to the sender saying that it has been reported. I choose not to send a
response for various reasons. Is there the equivalent of the -r option
for spamc.
-
spamassassin -r, as I recall, is used only to report spam to the Razor
system.
You probably mean to use "spamassassin -P"
However, all you need to do is, for the spamtrap mailboxes, you can still
use the same method.
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Jefferson Cowart wrote:
> Is it possible to set up a s
Very nice!
On my website [1] I have a public e-mail address which is created every time
you visit a page and contains date, time and IP of the visit. Now, finally,
I got some spam on some of those dummy addresses. It was all the same spam
titled "Compaq and IBM computers starting from $125 !!!
Is it possible to set up a spamtrap with the combination of spamc/spamd.
I have set up a few mailboxes that I have that get nothing but spam to
get mail piped into "spamassassin -r". However for my legitimate users I
already have a copy of spamd running. Is there any way I can utilize
this faster
IS anyone running DCC with SA-Exim? If so, what do you have to do to make
it work?
Also, does everyone use Razor and/or DCC with SA? Or do some just use SA by
itself? SA seems to do a good job just with its rules, so I'm wondering if
it's worth bothering with Razor or DCC.
TIA-
Todd
[EMAIL P
Is the 2.40 CVS good enough to use in production yet?
<>
|-Original Message-
|From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 12:51 PM
|To: Smart, Dan
|Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Razor no longer works for me!
|
|
|On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 12:43:31PM -0500, Smart, Dan wrote:
> Not sure when this started, but Razor no longer works. When running spamd
> -D, I get the following.
> After messing with configs, now I get a new error
>
> Original spamd output
> debug: Razor is available
> debug: Razor
Not sure when this started, but Razor no longer works. When running spamd
-D, I get the following.
After messing with configs, now I get a new error
Original spamd output
debug: Razor is available
debug: Razor Agents 1.20, protocol version 2.
debug: Read server list from /home/filte
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Said Bart Schaefer on Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 08:26:37AM -0700:
> On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Justin R. Miller wrote:
>
> > Yeah, "man spamassassin" and have a look at the -P argument.
>
> -P is implied with -t, so that's not the problem.
Oops, my mistake.
Mike Burger said:
> if you're using the default behavior of letting SA mark the subject
> line, then filtering via postfix works just fine.
>
> It might mean, however, that you have to enable procmail as the default
> MDA in your postfix/main.cf file.
It's not *necessarily* a requirement to use
Just insert the following code into the Spamassassin subroutine of
qmail-scanner-queue.pl to fix the Subject Re-write bug. I tried finding
settings for this with no avail, so why not just add some code.
START HERE ###
if ($sa_status == 1) { # Did spamc say it was
if you're using the default behavior of letting SA mark the subject line,
then filtering via postfix works just fine.
It might mean, however, that you have to enable procmail as the default
MDA in your postfix/main.cf file.
Just make sure that you have "mailbox = /usr/bin/procmail" uncommented
Hi,
did anyone know a way, to bring it working with the requirements in the
Subject-Line ??
Hope anyone can get me some hints/tips ...
Thanx and Greetings in advance,
--
Jörg Henner Fon: +49 (7 11) 48 90 83 - 0
ETES - EDV-Systemhaus GbRFax: +49
Justin Mason wrote:
> David Young said:
>
>
>>1. DOUBLE_CAPSWORD matches lines where there are no double capswords. This
>>is because it finds "URI:", which is text that spamassassin inserted itself
>>while processing the message.
>
>
> I don't know how long that rule's going to last, it gets
http://www.lmhsoft.com/
"..email marketing - You can accomplish these tasks with ease."
"...deliver personalized rich-text emails to a group of people using mailing
lists with just a mouse click."
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
David Young said:
> 1. DOUBLE_CAPSWORD matches lines where there are no double capswords. This
> is because it finds "URI:", which is text that spamassassin inserted itself
> while processing the message.
I don't know how long that rule's going to last, it gets loads of FPs ;)
> 2. REALLY_UNSA
I've implemented spamd/spamc in a system with about 950+ users. As many of
you
are probably aware or have experienced, a select group of people can't handle
changes. They don't like to see the words "Likely Spam" in their subjects,
they can't handle technical thoughts, and they think my proacti
ie. a learning filter; prob. using Bayesian stuff again I'd bet.
--j.
--- Forwarded Message
Date:Wed, 17 Jul 2002 16:21:59 +0100
From:Justin Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Justin Mason)
Subject: hmmm...
apple's mail app now features spam filtering.
soun
Thanks you, I realized my mistake seconds after posting. BTW, I'm using
Razor1 because the version of spamassassin I'm using doesn't support
Razor2. Does razor one use 2702/tcp as well?
-Original Message-
From: Tobias von Koch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 8
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Justin R. Miller wrote:
> Yeah, "man spamassassin" and have a look at the -P argument.
-P is implied with -t, so that's not the problem.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thi
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Fi Mail wrote:
> While trying to test spamassassin installing, i always end up with a
> 'broken pipe' or no output at all.
This is a bug in the way SA tests for availability of DCC, and also in the
way it handles errors when writing to dccproc.
Either install DCC, or creat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Said Fi Mail on Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 02:56:03PM +0100:
> ANy other ideas that i can test.
Yeah, "man spamassassin" and have a look at the -P argument.
- --
[!] Justin R. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Encrypted email preferred (key 0xC9C40C31)
I believe I have found two instances where rules match incorrectly:
1. DOUBLE_CAPSWORD matches lines where there are no double capswords. This
is because it finds "URI:", which is text that spamassassin inserted itself
while processing the message.
2. REALLY_UNSAFE_JAVASCRIPT matches even body t
On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 10:22, Hess, Mtodd, /mth wrote:
> Sorry, I should have been more clear. I did read about defang_mime in the
> manual. However, I've set defang_mime to 0 (everywhere I can find it), but
> it still does it.
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 11:11:25AM -0500, Hess, Mtodd, /mth wrot
>
> I'm using spamd in daemon mode with vpopmail: daemon spamd -d -v -u
> vpopmail -F 0
> What's the exact sintax forcing to read one configuration and not in the
> vpopmail users own maildir ?
> I must rise score from 5 to 7 and I don't know how.
>
> TYA.
>
Stop using the per user vpopmail conf
Spamassassin and broken pipe
While trying to test spamassassin installing, i always end up with a 'broken pipe'
or no output at all.
With the command
cat sample-nonspam.txt | spamassassin -Dt > nonspam.out
I get no output in nonspam.out.
with the command
spamassassin -Dt < sample-nonspam.txt
Ok, how can I understand if spamassassin is reading the home
configuration (in this case /home/vpopmail/.spamassassin) or from
/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf ?
TYA.
> You can make site_wide changes in
> /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf. I think
> this is probably what you really want, instead
You can make site_wide changes in /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf. I think
this is probably what you really want, instead of trying to force the
per-user files to all be the same.
At 03:22 PM 7/17/2002 +0200, Carlo Borelli wrote:
>I'm using spamd in daemon mode with vpopmail: daemon spamd -d -
The rules are static, and hand made. The "AI" part is done by the
developers to evolve the scores applied to rules, and is done prior to release.
/usr/share/spamassassin is the default location for the standard ruleset.
You can add your own custom rules in /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf for
s
> I'm using spamd in daemon mode with vpopmail: daemon spamd -d -v -u
> vpopmail -F 0
> What's the exact sintax forcing to read one configuration and
> not in the
> vpopmail users own maildir ?
> I must rise score from 5 to 7 and I don't know how.
>
-x flag will disable per-user configs.
---
I'm using spamd in daemon mode with vpopmail: daemon spamd -d -v -u
vpopmail -F 0
What's the exact sintax forcing to read one configuration and not in the
vpopmail users own maildir ?
I must rise score from 5 to 7 and I don't know how.
TYA.
-
> I'm considering whether to incoporate spamassassin
> into our main mailgateway (which is running amavis as email virus
> scan. The good thing is the new amavis has this spamassassin
> inclusion option) or not.
Well, amavisd-new has it. There are like 4 versions of amavis now -
amavis, amavisd,
Hi,
On Tue, 16 Jul 2002 15:30:48 -0400, Vince Puzzella wrote:
VP> Never mind. Did a "man spamd" and it told me 783 by default.
That's probably not what you want. 783/tcp is only used by spamd and I
doubt you want to connect to a spamd somewhere outside your network.
DCC uses port 6277/udp and
I'm considering whether to incoporate spamassassin
into our main mailgateway (which is running amavis as email virus
scan. The good thing is the new amavis has this spamassassin
inclusion option) or not. My main concern is how difficult it is
to configure its so called "rule base" which i think i
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Simon
> Barr
> Sent: 11 July 2002 15:17
> To: Spamassassin Users
> Subject: [SAtalk] Spamassasin and Exim pipe
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Apologies for the long post but I really like being able to
> filter s
44 matches
Mail list logo
