Jonathan M. Manning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On the other hand, they do know that there is no spam filtering on the
> server side of this list, and lots of people have it whitelisted.
99.99% of all spammers aren't that bright. They see something that
has an "@" in the middle of it and they
i use postfix, amavisd, spamassassin (and postfix does the inward
delivery) for exactly this process at several sites.
...
there's a pretty helpful (more detailed than usual) howto
for rh 7.3 at
http://www.geocities.com/scottlhenderson/spamfilter.html
maybe you could annotate that instead of wri
Oh, I don't really know one way or the other. Wondered if maybe Eudora was
simply overlooked, but I guess from what you're saying it's neither
"popular" enough to go positive like Outlook, nor "unpopular" enough to
have a negative score. Just kinda average.
My apologies for the missing Subject.
--On Sunday, November 03, 2002 9:25 AM -0800 John Rudd
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And the other side of the coin is ... how many spam messages (not reports
from list members talking about a spam they caught) have you seen come
through SAtalk? I have yet to see one.
Really? You must have missed
Got any statistics to show it's got a good S/O?
I know several spammers forge eudora headers, so I don't know for sure that
such a rule would wind up scoring negative when evaluated.
It might have even been a rule at one point and got dropped when they
pruned all the nonspam rules with S/O over
Is there a reason why I don't see an "X-Mailer header indicates a non-spam
MUA" rule for Eudora?
--
Randall Blank
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: ApacheCon, November 18-21 in
Las Vegas (supported by COMDEX), the onl
linus larsson wrote:
>>> I noticed a lot of spams have the header "Mime-Version: *.*" missing
>>> Maybe it should be rated.
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>> Mime-Version isn't a required header, so I'm not surprised to find
>> lots of mails without it.
Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The
Well I think I got this figured out. here is what I have in an
/etc/mail/aliases listing:
pokey: "| /usr/bin/procmail /etc/procmailrcs/pokey.rc"
then in pokey.rc:
:0fw
| spamassassin -x -D
:0
! [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Calling spamc doesn't work. Which makes sense, as it won't know what user to
run
The following is strictly to represent the scenario -
Goal:
Replacing our Windows based filter (if you could call it
that) that is using a program named Mail Essentials. It does not provide anywhere near the
throughput we need (~120/min) and I have been hoping to show our IT di
Well I can answer some parts of your question. First I'll refer you to the
man file.
man Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf
This will tell you how to format whitelist and blacklist commands.
Put your own custom rules/whitelists/blacklists in your
~/.spamassassin/user_prefs (the one in your home director
run spamassassin --lint, and spamasssassin -tD
It looks like one of your custom rules has a typo in it and spamassassin is
barfing trying to read your rule files. In particular I'd look for a rule
that's missing the ending / or /i, or anything containing ") ~" (minus the
quotes).
spamassassin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Thomas Nyman wrote:
> Hi
>
> Thankfully spamassassin works without much configuration. However its very
> hard to learn how to do special configurations. I have looked thouroughly
> at the documents on the Spamassassin.org site, an
Hello,
Im getting the following error message when running spamd,
--
(chris)(ralph|.spamassassin)$ Failed to run header SpamAssassin tests, skipping
some: syntax error at (eval 15) line 59, near ") ~"
syntax error at (eval 15) line 67, ne
Ah. Well then it begs the question, how do I get it to filter
smtp69.coolfunpages.com and smtpX.coolfunpages.com?
-Original Message-
From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:felicity@;kluge.net]
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 10:50 AM
To: Brossard, David
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:
Re-read the suggested rule I gave you, it does NOT contain a *. In fact,
it's a regex syntax error to have the * where you put it.
When adding custom rules I strongly recommed that you run spamassassin
--lint so you can see it complain about syntactic errors like your version
had. Under normal
I think what you're looking for is in man Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf. That
outlines the configuration parameters which can be put into your
~/.spamassassin/user_prefs (per user config) and
/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf (sitewide config).
Whitelist entries would be in the form of
whitelist_from
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 10:55:26AM -0800, Brossard, David wrote:
> Ah. Well then it begs the question, how do I get it to filter
> smtp69.coolfunpages.com and smtpX.coolfunpages.com?
As I stated, use ".*" instead of "*". I would personally use something
like /smtp.{1,5}\.coolfunpages\.com/i
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 10:40:16AM -0800, Brossard, David wrote:
> > header MY_BLACKLISTED_RCVD Received=~/*coolfunpages.com/
I think the problem is that the RE should be .* not * (it's regular
expression, not file globbing ... :) )
$ perl -e 'print yes if /*foo/'
Quantifier follows
Hi
Thankfully spamassassin works without much configuration. However its very
hard to learn how to do special configurations. I have looked thouroughly
at the documents on the Spamassassin.org site, and I have also looked at
man spamassassin. Still I do not comprehend basics...I'm sure its my
faul
Thanks for the response. I actually tried that originally and
thought it was being ignored for the spaces.
-Original Message-
From: Justin Mason [mailto:jm@;jmason.org]
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 10:38 AM
To: Brossard, David
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Custo
Brossard, David said:
> I asked earlier about a way to block messages if they are
> received from a certain set of servers. Someone very kindly provided me
> with a custom rule to filter them out via header info. Unfortunately no
> matter what I try the new custom rule is being ignored. I h
I asked earlier about a way to block messages if they are
received from a certain set of servers. Someone very kindly provided me
with a custom rule to filter them out via header info. Unfortunately no
matter what I try the new custom rule is being ignored. I have other
custom headers with
Classification: PUBLIC
I'm located on a T-1 into the AT&T Atlanta hub. No "barbed wire" here.
Thanks for the info.
<>
|-Original Message-
|From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 10:31 AM
|To: Smart, Dan
|Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: Re:
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 01:52:42PM +0100, linus larsson wrote:
> > I noticed a lot of spams have the header "Mime-Version: *.*" missing
> > Maybe it should be rated.
>
> Mime-Version isn't a required header, so I'm not surprised to find lots
> of mails
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 09:14:19AM -0600, Smart, Dan wrote:
> In my timings, I have found that the public Razor2 takes a minimum of 8
> seconds, and an average of 10 seconds. It often goes much longer: 15-18
> seconds.
I guess it depends where you are, I usually have a response in < 2 seconds.
>
Steve Evans said the following on 01/11/02 18:18:
Where can I find an older version of SpamAssassin? I'm looking for a
2.3x version. My false negative rate on 2.43 is through the roof.
CPAN.
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: ApacheCo
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 01:52:42PM +0100, linus larsson wrote:
> I noticed a lot of spams have the header "Mime-Version: *.*" missing
> Maybe it should be rated.
Mime-Version isn't a required header, so I'm not surprised to find lots
of mails without it.
In a quick check of my corpus:
Spam: 1641
I am running Razor 2.20. Running spamassassin -t < sample-spam.txt (without
the -D) runs fine and detects it in Razor. When running it through
sendmail/mimedefang there is no sign of Razor.
-Original Message-
From: Henning Daum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, November 02,
Usually there is more than 1 server but I just noticed that there is
only 1 catalogue server in my servers.catalogue.lst. The only one in
there is truth. If there is more that one you can change the order to
determine if it's a particular system and report a problem with it.
-Original Messag
Classification: PUBLIC
In my timings, I have found that the public Razor2 takes a minimum of 8
seconds, and an average of 10 seconds. It often goes much longer: 15-18
seconds.
Question #1: Has the timeout parameter for Razor been fixed?
Question #2: Does anyone get better performance than this?
All,
We updated recently our SA to 2.43 and things are still going well.
We are however experiencing Spam tagging on return-receipt mail. The
main score comes from USER_IN_BLACKLIST . I guess this come from the included
message (we are not supposed to
Hi, my name is Linus Larsson
I noticed a lot of spams have the header "Mime-Version: *.*" missing
Maybe it should be rated.
/Linus
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: ApacheCon, November 18-21 in
Las Vegas (supported by COMDEX), the onl
Adam Henry said:
> I am seeking comments about a problem I have been faced with.
> SpamAssassin seems to check the To: and CC: headers to determine
> if address match expressions contained in one of the whitelists.
> Since spammers forge their To: and CC: address anyways, this isn't a
> very relia
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 10:29:22 -0700
"David McCall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can someone throw me a pointer?
Qmail-scanner should work. We used it for a while but it lacks some features
I needed and I'm not that fond of perl to begin with so hacking it was out of
the question. Ended up with a s
David McCall said the following on 26/10/02 18:29:
Hi all,
Should be a simple question, but, I've looked thru the archives and havn't
found an implementation for Spamassassin with Qmail,
specifically on a Solaris platform.
Can someone throw me a pointer?
I tried qmailscanner first, and while it
35 matches
Mail list logo
