I have recently installed 2.41 on a clean install. I was using 2.20.
Spamassassin is in the headers but it not picking up anything. I am not sure
what I missed. Here are my headers. Thanks for the help.
Doug
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 7517 i
What do I have to do to get the CHARSET_FARAWAY_* tests to work? I want
it to immediately pitch any non-English (or ISO-8859*) charsets (big5 in
particular) that it finds in Subject, etc. lines or body text.
--
Palladium: First they came for the Linux desktop users, but I said
nothing,
becaus
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 03:43:29PM -0700, Cheryl L. Southard wrote:
> > However, I still think that spamd should be able to setuid to the
> > user by itself. According to the man page for spamd:
> > -u username, --username=username
> > R
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 01:50:33PM -0700, Kevin Gagel wrote:
> Here is a random sampling from my server. One of the highest ones I saw in
> skimming over two days worth was 47 seconds and one of the lowest I saw was 12
> seconds.
Yeah, it's the basic definition of "distributed system" (when a sys
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 03:43:29PM -0700, Cheryl L. Southard wrote:
> And when I change my /etc/procmailrc file to use "spamassassin -P" instead
> of spamc, then it works fine and uses my user_prefs file. I guess
> something is strange with spamc/spamd.
The answer, I believe, is that when runni
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 03:43:29PM -0700, Cheryl L. Southard wrote:
> However, I still think that spamd should be able to setuid to the
> user by itself. According to the man page for spamd:
>-u username, --username=username
> Run as the named user. The alternative, default
>
Kevin Gagel wrote:
>
> Here is a random sampling from my server. One of the highest ones I saw in
> skimming over two days worth was 47 seconds and one of the lowest I saw was 12
> seconds.
> > > What I want to be able to say is something like "a Pentium IV with 512Mb of RAM
>and
> > > a SCSI d
Hi,
AMD 1.2 Ghz with 256 meg ram
Approx 200K messages a day
No network tests except a local DCC server
Average time is 1.13 seconds, probably due to the odd spam that times out on
the MX lookup which I've changed to a default of 2 instead of 3.
I'm not running without Network tests, I just set
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 06:39:49PM -0400, David Corbin wrote:
> Is there a way to have this summary added (at the end) for non-spam
> messages, so that I can see why certain spam messages are no being
> detected, and by how many points they're not being detected?
spamassassin -t
:) It adds a
begin quote from Kevin Gagel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> written 2002-09-24:
Here's a sampling from my logs:
13:10:53 filter1 spamd[29471]: clean message (0/8) for (unknown):100 in 0
seconds.
Sep 3 13:10:59 filter1 spamd[29472]: clean message (0/8) for (unknown):100 in
0 seconds.
Sep 3 13:11:10 fil
Quoting Mariano Absatz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Does anyone have hard data about msgs/sec SA performance? I'd like to know
> what
> hardware/software you use (cpu, ram, hd type/size/speed, os, smtp server
> soft,
> anything else you find relevant).
I'm running SA on RedHat 7.3 with ext3 using th
Hi all,
While installing Spamassassin on my virtual host I'm encountering some errors :
opendir(./../..): Permission denied at
/usr/local/lib/perl5/5.6.0/Pod/Html.pm line 784
and
make: execvp: ./configure: Permission denied
make: *** [binaries.mk] Error 127
I have no root access. How do I s
Hi Steve,
Thanks for the speedy reply.
And YES, putting the line "DROPPRIVS=yes" into my /etc/procmailrc file
seems to fix the problem. So I guess this is a procmail way to fix my
problem.
However, I still think that spamd should be able to setuid to the
user by itself. According to the man
I've just installed SpamAssassin, and I'm trying to tune it correctly.
When SPAM is detected, it provides the nice little summary that explains
what rules added how many points, right at the front of the message.
Is there a way to have this summary added (at the end) for non-spam
messages, s
"Steve Thomas" said:
> I hope that helps, and I also hope it's right!
nice one Steve -- sounds likely to me ;)
--j.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
This is just an semi-educated guess - if I'm wrong, someone please correct
me!
Spamd setuid's to the user running spamc. Since you're calling spamc from a
global procmailrc file, it's being run as root (most likely). If called as
root, spamd won't open user_prefs files.
>From the spamc man page:
On Tuesday 24 September 2002 06:30 am, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Neulinger, Nathan wrote:
> > Does SA do any scoring based on the combination of rules?
>
> Yes. See perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf.
Specifically, meta rules.
--
Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on
fir
Hello,
I'm new to the list and spamassassin. I've setup a Debian Woody 3.0 box
with spamassassin and exim successfully delivering to local users. My
next task is putting together a second box which serves as an email
gateway. I included the following in my exim.conf under the transports
sectio
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm running SA 2.41 out of FreeBSD ports, and I get this for every
message tested:
Sep 24 17:45:02 antispam1 spamd[25079]: Failed to run header
SpamAssassin tests, skipping some: Global symbol "@email" requires
explicit package name at (e
Hi All,
I am running SpamAssassin 2.41 with procmail as my local delivery agent
with sendmail. I use spamc/spamd so that it runs site-wide from
/etc/procmailrc.
spamd is run as root with the flags "-d -a -c", and spamc isn't run with
any flags.
When I was testing the program, I deployed spamc
Thanks for your response. Yes, I did restart spamd everytime that I made
the config change. I tried 2.31 before and now 2.41 but neither works for
me. Below is the debugging log. We are running RedHat 7.3 and
sendmail-8.12.5 with /usr/sbin/sendmailfilter -h -i -p inet:2526@localhost
-s spamd:783@
Here is a random sampling from my server. One of the highest ones I saw in
skimming over two days worth was 47 seconds and one of the lowest I saw was 12
seconds.
Sep 24 10:30:03 spam spamd[9868]: clean message (1.9/5.0) for root:99 in 27
seconds, 4310 bytes.
Sep 24 10:30:24 spam spamd[9885]: cl
Have you restarted spamd?
You'll need to, to make the change active.
I'm using 2.41 and previously 2.x with this feature, and no problems.
> Cindi Ma wrote:
>
> Hi, all
>
> Since users like to keep the Embedded HTML in their e-mails, I have been
> trying to make defang_mime working. But there i
Title: Message
Hi,
all
Since users
like to keep the Embedded HTML in their e-mails, I have been
trying to make defang_mime working. But there is no luck. Need some help
here.
I have
/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf file configured as below:
defang_mime
0
required_hits
7.5
report_header
Hi.
I finally got mysql support up and running with spamassassin which is
great! I now call spamd like this
spamd -d -x -q -c -a
And call it from within a maildrop .mailfilter file (xfilter "spamc -u
username")
However, in my logs I still see the following message:
Sep 24 15:07:06 sunserver
Martin Radford said:
>
> To my untutored eye, I think the main problem was that none of the
> rules looking for large sums of money were triggered (i.e. US_DOLLARS*)
> I don't understand the regexps well enough to work out what could be
> changed here.
> One thing I have noticed about these Nige
>Now my question. I am interested in having spamassassin use a "plus
> address" for things that it flags as spam. Can anyone tell me how I
> could have spamassassin change the "to" address say from
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for messages marked as
> spam?
I think you could d
> "KG" == Kevin Gagel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
KG> From this message I see that processing should be around 10
KG> seconds or less on a average email if you are using Razor with
KG> SA. I am using razor and my average seems to be around 20 - 30
KG> seconds for each message. So I would like
We are using Qmail and utilizing a script to call spamc/spamd on all
incoming email.
So far it is working great. And now I am fine tuning the scores to help
cut down on false positives/negatives.
But unfortunately Spamd is not inserting the X-Spam rating into the
headers of non-spam email.
I h
At Tue Sep 24 05:24:18 2002, Simon Matthews wrote:
>
> Attached is a gzip version of Nigerian scam. Using SA 2.31, it only scored
> 2.6.
>
> Anyone care to look at it?
It scored 3.4 with 2.41, though of course there were no headers which
might have changed this.
To my untutored eye, I think
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Gagel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 24 September 2002 17:47
> To: SpamAssassin-Talk list
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] SA performance info
>
>
> Sorry everyone I missed the original...
> From this message I see that processing should be around 10
> seco
Title: Message
Hey
Rhonda:
It
sounds as if you have spamassassin installed, and I will assume that if you
recently installed it you are on one of the later versions. Make your
changes to spamassassin in the local.cf file so that they are not overwritten
when you upgrade. Ie, depending o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Said Rhonda Coble on Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 10:42:03PM -0500:
> If anyone can tell me how to get information on setting up this
> program to work in a beneficial way for me, I'd appreciate it.
> ThanksI know nothing about it but have received lots
Sorry everyone I missed the original...
>From this message I see that processing should be around 10 seconds or less on a
average email if you are using Razor with SA. I am using razor and my average
seems to be around 20 - 30 seconds for each message. So I would like to know if
there is something
In my local.cf I have
ok_languagesall
ok_locales all
Why then does SA tag mail for the $subject as spam??
-Wash
--
Odhiambo Washington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "The box said 'Requires
Wananchi Online Ltd. www.wananchi.com Windows 95, NT, or better,'
Tel: +254 2 313985-9 +25
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 04:10:48PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Yes, but that wasn't the question. ;) I know about formmail.cgi's
> security holes, but I've never seen one where the message comes first,
> then a blank "your message below" area.
>
> I wasn't sure if there was a section in for
El 24 Sep 2002 a las 10:29, Vivek Khera escribió:
> > "MA" == Mariano Absatz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> MA> I know this is definitively a muddy item, but I have to come
> MA> through it... We are planning to integrate SA into a border smtp
> MA> gateway to process, tag and accept all mai
> "MA" == Mariano Absatz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MA> I know this is definitively a muddy item, but I have to come
MA> through it... We are planning to integrate SA into a border smtp
MA> gateway to process, tag and accept all mail coming from the
MA> Internet for a large ISP.
For a "larg
Nope on the jail Q. What's more weird is if I move
my @PATH = File::Spec->path();
Dbg ("@PATH");
to the head of Dns.pm and change it from a dbg call to a print it
works.
With this debug line, the return is just
debug: _=/usr/local/bin/spamassassin
So it looks like the only thing in the environ
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 05:44:30PM -0400, Rose, Bobby wrote:
> In 2.50, should the Dns.pm module be getting the dcc_path or pyzor_path
> set in Conf.pm? I see the refs there in Dns.pm, but no where else to
> get the actual path so therefore the tests fail.
The code takes dcc_path if it exists, o
Neulinger, Nathan wrote:
> Does SA do any scoring based on the combination of rules?
Yes. See perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_
Does SA do any scoring based on the combination of rules?
Seems like this would be a good way to handle some of the mutations and
"avoid SA" changes that some spams are using. Basically, add some extra
small number of positive/negative points based on messages that include
combinations of rules.
Hi Bobby,
On Tuesday 24 September 2002 02:45 CET Rose, Bobby wrote:
> File::Spec is installed on Solaris 8 and I tested File::Spec->path(); in
> a simple perl script and the array contains data but when used in Dns.pm
> it doesn't contain anything. I even threw in a
>
> my @PATH = File::Spec->pa
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Halligan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 23 September 2002 21:02
> To: Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail)
> Subject: [SAtalk] Postfix as an MTA with SA -- forwarding spam
>
>
> I am running Postfix as a gateway MTA (no local delivery) and
> am using SA to
James R. Van Zandt said:> Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ahh, you are deceived by truncation. They actually can match one
> > nonspam and still be 0.000% because the nonspam corpus is > 100k
> > messages :)
>
> I think that's a bug. The output precision should be increased.
Pr
I am running spamassassin 2.31
After having trouble using spamd/spamc with my virtual postfix+mysql
setup, I went back to using spamassassin -P, but want to try to get the
daemon working right.
I currently use the user "mail" for purposes of calling maildrop as a
transport from postfix.
I have
Hi.
I am running spamassassin 2.31
After having trouble using spamd/spamc with my virtual postfix+mysql
setup, I went back to using spamassassin -P, but want to try to get the
daemon working right.
I currently use the user "mail" for purposes of calling maildrop as a
transport from postfix.
I
47 matches
Mail list logo
