Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-27 21:58:16 -0700]:
> You need to GA score the RBL rules to achieve a good FP:FN ratio.
> Without GA scoring of the RBLs, you will raise your FPs too much
> because the rest of the GA scores are tuned to achieve a good FP:FN
> ratio.
I disagree that man
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
> Continuing that thought, I disagree that RBLs should be used by the
> GA in SA at all. That RBL data can be different at different times.
> I really believe the GA should be trained on the content of the
> message without RBL input. If it is deprived of
smime.p7m
Description: application/pkcs7-mime
Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-27 12:56:50 -0400]:
> BP> It is better to delete it than to bounce it. Most of all spam is
> BP> injected with no way to receive a bounce. If you have received it
> BP> then it is now to late to bounce it to the spammer since they have
>
> Only if you do
Danita Zanre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-27 10:10:04 -0600]:
> As a totally off-topic aside - am I the only female who posts to this list?
> The last time I posted about a month ago someone referred to me as "he" -
> so I'm feeling very geeky .
Does mistaken identity have anything to do with b
Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-27 20:12:53 -0700]:
> My problem with SPEWS is that it is not an accurate way to tag spam.
> There are too many FPs.
I have heard a lot of derisive commentary about relays.osirusoft.com
but people still use them. Why? Here is some data.
I just went t
On Friday 27 September 2002 20:12, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > So you admit that your provider is harboring spammers and ignoring
> > complaints about them. As a customer you're in a better position to
> > discuss the problem with your provider than anybody else.
>
> Wo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So you admit that your provider is harboring spammers and ignoring
> complaints about them. As a customer you're in a better position to
> discuss the problem with your provider than anybody else.
Wow, what a flaming strawman argument! I admitted nothing of the
sor
OK I think that was it.
I ran a test with -D and saw the following messages:
is Net::DNS::Resolver unavailable? 1
is DNS available? 0
I interpreted that to mean Net::DNS was not installed or not working. I
figured out how to find and install it after a couple of failed attempts and
now the test
Daniel Quinlan said:
> 2. It's not my job. Why should I be forced to harass the ISP because we
>are unlucky enough have IP addresses near some spammers? The SPEWS
> policy just adds to the harm created by spammers. Spammers know how
> to avoid RBLs and often do, they just switch ISPs and c
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Max Clark wrote:
> Has anyone ever used smtpprox? To integrate with Spamassassin and
> Postfix?
>
> http://bent.latency.net/smtpprox/
I looked at that code. In fact, that was one of the original code bases I
was using when I was originally designing the SMTP "guts" for wh
Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I definitely agree that trying to separate out some of the lists might be
> a good thing, instead of using relays.osirusoft.com as a single query. Of
> course this also has the drawback of requiring more DNS lookups to get a
> good sampling of lists, but that's p
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Have you asked your provider why they don't just boot the spammers?
No, for several reasons:
1. Free colocation is extremely hard to find. We would be crazy to
rock the boat.
2. It's not my job. Why should I be forced to harass the ISP because we
are unlucky
> Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Yes, but with SPEWS, you are listed if you share the same ISP as a
> spammer. I help maintain a /27 network (32 consecutive IP addresses)
> used by several non-profit .org sites (no spammers!), but we are listed
> on SPEWS because there are spammers
For the record, I am aware of the point Dan makes, and in fact I have
more-or-less the same point of view. My original posting mentions it
specifically as being a "high collateral damage policy". It's unclear to me
why Dan quoted this as if it was a counter-point to my message, but just to
avo
Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, going back up in the thread to my posting yesterday:
>
> http://relays.osirusoft.com/cgi-bin/rbcheck.cgi
>
> This lists which blocklists that OSI uses are listing an IP, and in the
> case of spews, gives links over to spews where you can check
Has anyone ever used smtpprox? To integrate with Spamassassin and
Postfix?
http://bent.latency.net/smtpprox/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Max
Clark
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 2:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SAtalk] Smt
> >Some other "negative" scores that I find odd:
> >
> >SPAM: LOW_PRICE (-1.2 points) BODY: Lowest Price
> >SPAM: HTML_FONT_COLOR_RED (-1.2 points) BODY: HTML font color is red
> >SPAM: BIG_FONT (-0.4 points) BODY: FONT Size +2 and up
> or 3 and up
The 2.42 scores for these are
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 01:48:57PM -0700, Simon Matthews wrote:
> IIRC, I had to do a 'force install' to get Net::DNS to install on my RH 6.2
> systems.
>
>
How about introducing a new SpamAssassin switch such as
-f --features Print version for various Perl modules, main values and SA version
On 27 Sep 2002 at 11:24, Robert L Mathews wrote:
> At 9/27/02 6:51 AM, Michael Moncur wrote:
>
> >> Being listed in SPEWS will trigger these rules:
> >>
> >> RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM - generic rule
> >> X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC - SPEWS specific?
> >
> >According to osirusoft, this is not SPEWS spe
IIRC, I had to do a 'force install' to get Net::DNS to install on my RH 6.2
systems.
Simon
At 11:46 AM 9/27/02 -0700, Tom at ATT wrote:
>Thanks for the response.
>
> > Are you having trouble getting any of the DNS blacklists to work, or just
> > the MAPS RBL?
>Nope, none are working. (MAPS i
Yes, going back up in the thread to my posting yesterday:
http://relays.osirusoft.com/cgi-bin/rbcheck.cgi
This lists which blocklists that OSI uses are listing an IP, and in the
case of spews, gives links over to spews where you can check the evidence
file for the particular listing.
At 12:
Arnaud Abelard wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there anyway to configure Spamassassin or procmail (the system is
> using spamd) to reject the mail instead of marking it as spam?
You might be able to bounce the message with procmail/SA but you can't
reject it. The reason is that you've already
On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 04:51, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> It sort of a shame that Osirusoft doesn't have a way to indicate which
> lists are included in a query-response (e.g. a bit per incorporated list
> in its response).
Can one query the TXT entry for a listed site to get more detail?
Thanks for the response.
> Are you having trouble getting any of the DNS blacklists to work, or just
> the MAPS RBL?
Nope, none are working. (MAPS is still "turned off" because we're a
commercial site.)
> You should certainly see a lot of spam matching RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM.
Nope, nothing.
> I
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 11:34:17AM -0700, Tom at ATT wrote:
> Well this is all pretty foggy to me, but I'm running spamd using the
> supplied spamassassin script which uses the -d -c -a options. Then spamc
> gets called from procmailrc with only a -u option because it complained
> about running a
I am getting the following after doing a make test on SA 2.41..
[root:/home/esix/SpamAssassin/Mail-SpamAssassin-2.41]#make test
PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/bin/perl -Iblib/arch -Iblib/lib
-I/usr/local/lib/perl5/5.6.1/sun4-solaris -I/usr/local/lib/perl5/5.6.1 -e
'use Test::Harness qw(&runtests $verbos
Thanks a lot guys... I've got a much saner setup now...
(Used to be 100+ spam mail messages to scan through a day for false
positives). Not it seems like 80% is getting filtered out.)
Now lets just hope I don't get a really important message over spam leve 12
:)
cheers,
-- Anant
PS: Why isn'
> How are you running SA? Any "-L" in there? :)
Well this is all pretty foggy to me, but I'm running spamd using the
supplied spamassassin script which uses the -d -c -a options. Then spamc
gets called from procmailrc with only a -u option because it complained
about running as root.
Thanks,
T
At 9/27/02 6:51 AM, Michael Moncur wrote:
>> Being listed in SPEWS will trigger these rules:
>>
>> RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM - generic rule
>> X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC - SPEWS specific?
>
>According to osirusoft, this is not SPEWS specific:
>
>>127.0.0.4 Confirmed Spam Source
>>A site has been ident
Are you having trouble getting any of the DNS blacklists to work, or just
the MAPS RBL?
You should certainly see a lot of spam matching RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM.
If you don't do you have the perl Net::DNS installed? I think that's needed
to make the DNS blacklists to work, but can't say for sure.
www.roogoo.com in the body... arrrgh.. I've been getting at least 4-5 of
them a *day* on my Mac OS X box. I really need to dump AMS and put
postfix/uw-imap/ipop3d and spamassassin on the machine. Grrr
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 09:45:01AM -0700, Tom at ATT wrote:
> Any tricks to getting RBL to work?
How are you running SA? Any "-L" in there? :)
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Anybody interested in entrepreneurship, and/or beer ..." - Prof. Vaz
msg08194/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signatur
I'm going out of town, and have created an out-of-office rule that is NOT supposed to
reply to anyone from this list - but it has triggered twice already somehow - so
here's my apology in advance - I'm still trying to find out why it won't work, but if
some of you get a response for me, then
> "BP" == Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Is there anyway to configure Spamassassin or procmail (the system is
>> using spamd) to reject the mail instead of marking it as spam?
BP> It is better to delete it than to bounce it. Most of all spam is
BP> injected with no way to receiv
I moved my SA machine into production to see if that would cause RBL to
start working but still no luck.
Yes, I can do DNS lookups.
I assume I'd see some Spam: Hit! messages referring to the RBL if it was
working, right?
I'm catching about 95% of all spam for a small company with the default
ru
> Message: 15
> Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: "Jay Strickland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 18:25:03 -0400
> Subject: [SAtalk] Outlook Configuration
>
> I've gotten SA configured on my server to scan messages
> server-wide w/ exim. The headers are
> Is there anyway to configure Spamassassin or procmail (the system is
> using spamd) to reject the mail instead of marking it as spam?
It is better to delete it than to bounce it. Most of all spam is
injected with no way to receive a bounce. If you have received it
then it is now to late to b
The scores are assigned by a genetic algorithm. Essentially two piles of
email are created, one of spam, one of nonspam. A SpamAssassin mass-check
is run to generate a set of one-line reports as to what rules each email in
each pile matches. The GA then has the task of examining these rule-matc
I put the 2.42 tarball up yesterday, and now I'm seeing this:
Sep 27 11:15:11 lerami.lerctr.org spamd[7185]: info: setuid to ler
succeeded
Sep 27 11:15:11 lerami.lerctr.org spamd[7185]: processing message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for
ler:101, expecting 2089 bytes.
Sep 27 11:15:12 lerami.lerctr.org spa
Thanks - yes, I've come across some other odd ones looking at the list and since
posting my first message I have adjusted some myself manually. Your list makes it
easier to think about - thanks!
I just wish there was a way now to compensate for the "spam" message being mosty in
the graphic li
>Some other "negative" scores that I find odd:
>
>SPAM: LOW_PRICE (-1.2 points) BODY: Lowest Price
>SPAM: HTML_FONT_COLOR_RED (-1.2 points) BODY: HTML font color is red
>SPAM: BIG_FONT (-0.4 points) BODY: FONT Size +2 and up or 3 and up
I also saw these curious negatives while
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 10:43:56AM -0400, Kenneth Nerhood wrote:
> debug: DCC is not available: dccproc not found.
>
> Any suggestions as to how to tell SA where dccproc is would be greatly
> appreciated.
In 2.41, SA searches $PATH for dccproc. In 2.42 however, there will be a
"dcc_path" option
I've just done a clean install on SA 2.41 on a new RedHat 7.3 box. I've
also installed DCC version 1.1.13 (just the dccproc portion).
Configured and tested dccproc successfully. I installed dcc in the
default location. And I installed Razor2.
When I run spamassassin -tD http://thinkgeek.com/sf
Mailscanner 4.0 (alpha) added support to bounce (not reject) and can be configured
with a rules list of what domains/IP to do or not do this to. The message sent back
has the header rewritten so that it doesn't bounce back to you if the address turned
out to be bogus also.
-Original Messag
> "FA" == Florin Andrei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
FA> Do you happen to have any hints on stripping down functionality on
FA> amavisd to use _only_ SpamAssassin and no antivir stuff? I'm searching
FA> strictly for a method to interface Postfix and SpamAssassin that works
FA> well under high
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 03:46:13PM -0500, Jeremy Turner wrote:
> I'm running Debian woody, and I grabbed the newest spamassassin from
> testing (2.41), yet I am still getting malformed headers. This leads me
> to believe that I have an MTA problem (exim, btw). But would I need to
> configure spa
> "MC" == Max Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MC> I am looking to integrate Spamassassin with Postfix. Reading the postfix
MC> documentation the best way seems to be by forwarding to an smtp server.
Just reading this list's archive for the last 5 days will give you
several recommendations
Hi all, this is my first message to the list, i hope mi question is not that
simple :-)
My question have 2 probably approaches:
1) How can (if can i) make a rule to have a pipe inside (p.e. cut
some_archive | grep some_regexp?
2) How can i add the value of another script (to the 'hits' var) a
Some other "negative" scores that I find odd:
SPAM: LOW_PRICE (-1.2 points) BODY: Lowest Price
SPAM: HTML_FONT_COLOR_RED (-1.2 points) BODY: HTML font color is red
SPAM: BIG_FONT (-0.4 points) BODY: FONT Size +2 and up or 3 and up
I notice when I go to www.spamassassin.org the
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> The advantage of Osirusoft.com is that you need only one net query to get
> results from all those RBLs merged by Osirusoft. Also should it avoid
> double scores because a site listed in two lists returns only one result.
>
> Malte
>
> P.S.: Those are
On Friday 27 September 2002 12:05 CET Justin Mason wrote:
> Daniel Quinlan said:
> > Perhaps we should generally move away from the multiple site rules
> > (ones that take inputs from more than one site) and focus on single
> > site rules. Then, the GA can do its thing better and we can do our ow
On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 06:11, Arnaud Abelard wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there anyway to configure Spamassassin or procmail (the system is
> using spamd) to reject the mail instead of marking it as spam?
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Arnaud Abélard
> Administrateur réseaux et systèmes
> Irin / Faculté de Sci
Florin Andrei wrote:
>A recent reply i got on this mailing list for a similar question
>mentioned amavisd-new as the better solution:
>
>http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/
>
>It looks really interesting.
>
>
>
Unfortunately amavisd-new has its own issues... some of it can be got
around by ha
Hello,
Is there anyway to configure Spamassassin or procmail (the system is
using spamd) to reject the mail instead of marking it as spam?
Thanks
--
Arnaud Abélard
Administrateur réseaux et systèmes
Irin / Faculté de Sciences
Université de Nantes
---
Daniel Quinlan said:
> Perhaps we should generally move away from the multiple site rules (ones
> that take inputs from more than one site) and focus on single site
> rules. Then, the GA can do its thing better and we can do our own
> determination of worth and write our own meta rules rather t
56 matches
Mail list logo
