At 20:10 +0100 2002-10-03, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>> If you wanted a CC rule, you'd need to make a CC rule, and you could Meta
>> the two together as a single rule.
Ah, but I shouldn't have to ;-) That's what computers are for.
>
>Actually, I added a shortcut for this very reason in 2.40 ;) Use
I have had a response that it is "both" and that the "latest docs in CVS"
should be "more up to date". I'm not sure where and how to find those docs
but in any case I am at a loss.
I have created a ~/.spamassassin.cf file several times. It is removed - every
time I create it, it is (eventually) r
Yes, each RBL has it's own scores and rules. Setting the score of a given
RBL rule disables it, setting it to anything but zero will enable it.
Maps, being a subscription service, is disabled per default.
Also note that if you're checking a given RBL at the MTA level, checking it
again in Spam
On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 11:20:15AM +0930, David Lloyd wrote:
> Which documentation? I got lost in it :-)
It's in at least INSTALL, and procmailrc.example for SA docs:
INSTALL:
6. Edit or create a .procmailrc file in your home directory containing the
below lines. If you already have a .procmail
Teho,
> Per the documentation, you want ":0fw" which tells procmail to use spamc
> as a filter. Without it, you try to deliver to spamc which isn't going
> to work for you since spamassassin doesn't do delivery.
Which documentation? I got lost in it :-)
DSL
--
Qualcuno no mi basta.
Vivere
On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 10:52:34AM +0930, David Lloyd wrote:
> :0
> | /usr/bin/spamc
>
> Any idea what might be happening or the other information that might be
> relevant?
Per the documentation, you want ":0fw" which tells procmail to use spamc
as a filter. Without it, you try to deliver to sp
I have:
[admin@linux admin]$ cat .procmailrc
LOGFILE=$HOME/pm.log
LOGABSTRACE="all"
VERBOSE="on"
:0
| /usr/bin/spamc
And then I went:
[lloy0076@linux lloy0076]$ mail
...
And got:
[admin@linux admin]$ cat pm.log
procmail: [3351] Fri Oct 4 10:48:49 2002
procmail: Assigning "LASTFOLDER=/usr
It looks like all of the different pages/posts I've seen on recommended SA setup talk
about turning off RBL lookups. I can understand this in that it could cause things to
timeout waiting on a response from a remote service. I have a subscription to MAPS
though and keep a local copy of their zo
Dan Abernathy wrote:
> I have a lot of users here who don't want their mail filtered at all. I have
>all_spam_to whitelist entries for these people set in the site-wide local.cf file.
>
> Occasionally, SA will flag something anyway, and I guess it has to do with how the
>header is formatted.
> > Why do I have a feeling that not even making spam (and spamming)
> > completely illegal would stop it at this point?
>
> Hasn't worked too well for pot, has it?
>
I really don't think you'll find government officials in Santa Cruz, CA
handing out spamming tools. Pot, yes. Spamming stuff? Dou
I used CPAN for installing update preq's. But I used a tar for SA. It was
however the easiest way to update things. I haven't used up2date yet :)
-Original Message-
From: McClung, Darren W. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 2:00 PM
To: 'rODbegbie'
Cc: [EMAIL
>From: "Steve Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Don Lindbergh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 1:48 PM
>Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Whitelisting with an alias
>
> As root, type:
>
> ln -s /path/to/spamassassin /etc/smrsh/spamassassin
>
> What's happening is t
On Thursday 03 October 2002 08:26 CET Vicki Brown wrote:
> The docs refer to ~/.spamassassin.cf but SpamAssassin creates a
> directory, ~/.spamassassin, and populates it with auto-whitelist.db and
> user_prefs.
>
> So, is it ~/.spamassassin.cf or ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs or either or
> both?
>
>
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 09:23:04PM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
> > 1004 (TO_MALFORMED borken),
>
> WONTFIX ;)
More like NOTABUG. :) (And I should know, I reported it!)
> OK, if there's nothing moderately serious shown up tonight, I'll release
> it tomorrow AM (GMT).
Out of curiousity, with al
Malte S. Stretz said:
> 1046 is fixed. But what about
> 1011 (add a notice about IRIX and -m to the docs),
> 1031 (cygwin's EXE_EXT),
> 1043 (a cosmetic but rather disturbing one ;-),
all now fixed!
> 1004 (TO_MALFORMED borken),
WONTFIX ;)
> 1006 (packaging related)?
eh, will leave this for
Richard Knepper said:
> Attempting to install SA on Solaris 8 with Perl 5.6.1, I get a SIGTERM
> and failure on (I think) t/spamd_maxsize. Any ideas?
it's a bug -- fixed in CVS.
--j.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome t
I have a lot of users here who don't want their mail filtered at all. I have
all_spam_to whitelist entries for these people set in the site-wide local.cf file.
Occasionally, SA will flag something anyway, and I guess it has to do with how the
header is formatted. Below is an example header (wit
Matt Kettler said:
> AFAIK the header rules should only check the header specified. In the
> context of SpamAssassin it would seem to be a truly broken behavior for a
> regex that explicitly specifies one header to be matched against another.
>
> If you wanted a CC rule, you'd need to make a
Daniel Rogers wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 02:25:59PM -0400, Kerry Nice wrote:
>> So, you haven't heard about drive-by spamming? You find an open wireless
>> lan connection and sit in somebody's front drive and spam away for a
>> while.
>
> No, but I can't hardly say as I'm surprised.
It's s
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 02:25:59PM -0400, Kerry Nice wrote:
> So, you haven't heard about drive-by spamming? You find an open wireless
> lan connection and sit in somebody's front drive and spam away for a while.
No, but I can't hardly say as I'm surprised.
Why do I have a feeling that not even
From: "Daniel Rogers"
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 03:29:08PM -0700, Matthew Cline wrote:
> > Geez, that's worse than using open relays. To what depths *won't*
spammers
> > sink to?
>
> None, clearly. It's only a matter of time before they start breaking in
to
> people's houses to send mail on thei
Attempting to install SA on Solaris 8 with Perl 5.6.1, I get a SIGTERM
and failure on (I think) t/spamd_maxsize. Any ideas?
Thanks in advance,
Rich Knepper
The tests look like:
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/per
At 07:37 PM 10/3/02 +0200, Arie Slob wrote:
>Simon Matthews wrote:
>
>Nah... that's Dutch, not German
My apologies to German and Dutch speakers around the world!
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http
Hi there Clifton first I wanted to tankyou for your reply it started the
wheels to turn again for me. And I have made alot of progress by now I am
able to sned all tagged spam msgs to my E-mail box. This is actualy GREAT.
But now I have one snag and I hope that you or the development community can
I've tried to build sa from CPAN before, and it did not go well. A tarball
build is probably still the least error-prone method.
Darren
-Original Message-
From: rODbegbie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 12:08
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SAtalk] Why isn't
Simon Matthews wrote:
> If I understand it, "BUGGY_CGI" is supposed to check for "Here is the
> result of your ..."
>
> This email had the same text, but translated into German.
>
> I am also seeing many instances of the same URL -- perhaps we need a
> check for it?
>
Nah... that's Dutch, not
1. 'touch ~/pm.log'
2. Put this at the top of your .procmailrc:
LOGFILE = $HOME/pm.log
LOGABSTRACT = "all"
VERBOSE = "on"
That will log relevant information about what procmail is doing with your
email. :-) Can be quite useful.
--Tomki
At 13:25 10/03/2002 -0400, Dan Simoes wrote:
>Af
After realizing that a system wide install for a busy mailing list
server was not a good idea, I decided to try it on a per-user basis.
Here's where I'm at, help greatly appreciated.
> cat .forward
"|IFS=' ' && exec /usr/bin/procmail -f- || exit 75 #dans"
> cat .procmailrc | grep -v ^#
:0fw
*
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 01:06:24PM -0400, Jevin Maltais wrote:
> I'm running Slack 8.0, kernel 2.4.18. P2-233 with 128megs of ram. I just
>upgraded from 2.20 to 2.41 and for some reason, spamassassin crashes and syslog
>saying it has run out of memory. I had no problems with 2.20 (memory
"Steve" == Steve Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve>
Steve> If the forwarding is being done via .forward, why not just use
Steve> procmail instead and check the message, then either drop it in your
Steve> spool dir or forward it if it's not spam?
I'm not sure I understand what you're p
Actually, that looks more like Dutch. "Donderdag" is not German for
Thursday - that word would be "Donnerstag".
Chris Kalin
- Original Message -
From: "Simon Matthews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:55 AM
Subject: [SAtalk] BUGGY_CGI -- n
Steve Thomas wrote:
> The easiest way to install SA would be to run:
>
> perl -MCPAN -e 'install Mail::SpamAssassin'
>
> and answer yes to any questions about following dependencies.
In my experience, CPAN certainly is the easiest way to install and/or
upgrade SA. SHouldn't we recommend its usag
Hi there,
I'm running Slack 8.0, kernel
2.4.18. P2-233 with 128megs of ram. I just upgraded from 2.20 to
2.41 and for some reason, spamassassin crashes and syslog saying it has run out
of memory. I had no problems with 2.20 (memory wise) but would cause
mailbox corruption so I want
On Thursday 03 October 2002 08:48, Mariano Absatz wrote:
> El 2 Oct 2002 a las 16:13, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth escribió:
> > > I use TMDA and simply add to its blacklist_wildcards list
> > > entries like *@=.kn (bye-bye North Korea) I currently limit its use
> > > in this way to rogue states.
> >
If I understand it, "BUGGY_CGI" is supposed to check for "Here is the
result of your ..."
This email had the same text, but translated into German.
I am also seeing many instances of the same URL -- perhaps we need a check
for it?
Simon
-- Forwarded message --
Return-Path: <
AFAIK the header rules should only check the header specified. In the
context of SpamAssassin it would seem to be a truly broken behavior for a
regex that explicitly specifies one header to be matched against another.
If you wanted a CC rule, you'd need to make a CC rule, and you could Meta
th
El 2 Oct 2002 a las 16:13, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth escribió:
> > I use TMDA and simply add to its blacklist_wildcards list
> > entries like *@=.kn (bye-bye North Korea) I currently limit its use
> > in this way to rogue states.
>
> Doesn't that method filter after receipt? Also, doesn't it let
Jeremy Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I realized that I hadn't sent this reply back to the group...
[snip]
I'm wondering if a spammer included a bogus X-Spam-Status: header in the
spam. Most how-to examples have people checking to scan emails only if
that header does not exist. Couldn't a s
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 11:07:30AM -0400, Don Stafford wrote:
> Do I have to do anything other than install, and then run the spamassassin
> 'start' routine in etc/rc.d/init.d that actually starts spamd?
Do you call spamc from somewhere (procmail, a milter/qmail-scanner/etc)?
--
Randomly Genera
Vicki Brown said:
> The docs refer to ~/.spamassassin.cf but SpamAssassin creates a directory,
> ~/.spamassassin, and populates it with auto-whitelist.db and user_prefs.
>
> So, is it ~/.spamassassin.cf or ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs or either or both?
the latter. The current CVS doco I think
OK - I spoke too soon
Apparently SA is not working
Do I have to do anything other than install, and then run the spamassassin
'start' routine in etc/rc.d/init.d that actually starts spamd?
spamd is running
Don Stafford,
Jeremy Turner said:
> I'm wondering if a spammer included a bogus X-Spam-Status: header in the
> spam. Most how-to examples have people checking to scan emails only if
> that header does not exist. Couldn't a spammer include this and escape
> spamassassin unscathed? Or could the X-Spam-Status:
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 10:26:51AM -0400, Doug Appleton wrote:
> Oct 3 10:26:20 csilx3 spamd[9330]: Bareword found where operator expected at
> (eval 21) line 1141, near "9a"
> Oct 3 10:26:20 csilx3 spamd[9330]: ^I(Missing operator before a?)
> Oct 3 10:26:20 csilx3 spamd[9330]: Failed to comp
We are running spamassassin 2.20 systemwide with postfix, but have
noticed a gradual uptick in spam getting through of late. Our
spamassassin was installed by someone else, and my knowledge is pretty
low. Questions:
1. Would updating to a later version likely reduce the spam getting
throu
Are there any open source OCR programs? Or possibly Xerox could be coaxed to
release a "lite" version of its Textbridge recognition engine under GPL,
they certainly could use some positive PR nowadays.
Combined with a GA we should be able to target the most suspicious images
for recognition and co
In looking at the logs this morning, it's filtering okay, but I noticed this
problem.. Any thoughts?
Oct 3 10:26:20 csilx3 spamd[9330]: Bareword found where operator expected at
(eval 21) line 1141, near "9a"
Oct 3 10:26:20 csilx3 spamd[9330]: ^I(Missing operator before a?)
Oct 3 10:26:20 cs
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 09:17:55AM -0400, Don Stafford wrote:
> However, I cannot find a 'log' file to see what is being dumped.
>
> Is there one? How do I know if valid emails are being dumped?
Well, spamassassin doesn't "dump" any emails, it's just a filter. So the
only log you can see is, by
Does anyone use Pop3Proxy with Spamassassin on Linux?
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTEC
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 01:15:14PM +0200, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> How do I know RBL lookup is working in SA? From the documentation I have
> concluded that if "skip_rbl_checks 0" is set SA should do RBL lookups.
And if Net::DNS is installed correctly, yes.
> BTW, is there any way do log SA
I just setup SA on a RH 7.3 box.
I copied the redhat startup script in /etc/rc.d/init.d and ran it with the
start option.
SPAMD is running... and is apparently working as our incoming spam overnight
was cut tremendously.
However, I cannot find a 'log' file to see what is being dumped.
Is there
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 10:39:29PM -0600, Michael Moncur wrote:
> An eval test that specifically looks for an IMG tag and not much else might
> be good too.
If my mail is reasonably standard, then I imagine it would do well -
when people email me pictures for real, they're almost always
attachmen
Hi again,
I asked the following and I am sorry if the answer is completely obvious
but I would really appriciate an answer...
***
How do I know RBL lookup is working in SA? From the documentation I have
concluded that if "skip_rbl_checks 0" is set SA should do RBL lookups.
However, I never saw
52 matches
Mail list logo
