RE: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary in the future?

> This is possible, but many (okay, I) consider it arrogant, obnoxious > and just generally annoying. I've had users report bugs to me for > Debian, and then when I respond, they want me to jump through a hoop > so my mail (that THEY REQUESTED) gets to them. I agree. I've never considered myself i

Re: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary in the future?

Jason Qualkenbush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think you're missing the point of the concept. [...] I'd love to > use a system like that, but I never know ahead of time what email > address a confirmation from amazon.com or whatever is going to come > from. > > I would assume that it would n

Re: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary in the future?

On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 09:50:25PM +0800, Ronald Wiplinger wrote: > > I just come accross the article at http://slate.msn.com/?id=2074042 which > describes that each new sender must first himself identify by answering a > return message. I love that idea! > > Is such a module available within S

Re: [SAtalk] SQL and SA.

> What am I doing wrong as I have spent all day trying to get SA and MySQL > to work to no avail. > > local.cf > rewrite_subject 0 > defang_mime 0 > report_header 1 > use_terse_report 1 > user_scores_dsn DBI:mysql:spamassassin:localhost I had to also put these in: user_scores_sql

[SAtalk] OT: Newest 419 Scam (BOFH)

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/30/28234.html -- Steve Thomas Network Administrator APEX Voice Communications, Inc. --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _

RE: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary in the future?

I am not a TMDA user or developer, but it does allow for acking of mail that won't pass the challenge/responce (mailling lists, automated e-mails from amazon.com and such). It keeps a queue of stuff that it didn't let through for a configurable time (24hr default). You have to manually add maillin

RE: [SAtalk] Distribute the load

If the load is that large it would probably justify a hardware or dedicated software load-balancing solution. Doesn't Red hat appears to have an "active" load balancing solution: http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/advserver/RHLAS-2.1-Manual/install-guide/ s1-lvs-scheduling.html http://makeashorterl

Re: [SAtalk] Distribute the load

True, spamd doesn't need much for state info, and each connection is independent of other connections. I was thinking along the lines of spamc trying to do the load-ballancing by determining which server out of a list it should contact, as opposed to having multiple IP addresses for an A-record

Re: [SAtalk] Distribute the load

Rich Puhek said: > The conceptual problem with doing round-robin spamd servers is that the > mail server itself would have to maintain some state info to determine > which spamd server it shoud contact (unless it randomly selected one). > Given most implementations (procmail for lots of us), ma

Re: [SAtalk] No changes in the last week?

Tomki said: > http://www.spamassassin.org/dist/ > Changes file is dated 13 Nov. more likely the cron job has stopped, doh. must fix it... --j. --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _

Re: [SAtalk] Mail Looping problem

Possibly running SMRSH, and haven't told sendmail that you want to allow procmail to run. Try adding a symink to procmail from the /usr/lib/sm.bin/ directory. That should get things rolling. --Rich Carmine DiMascio wrote: I attempted to setup spamassassin according to the instructions in the

Re: [SAtalk] Get rid of some headers?

Steve Thomas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) had this to say on 11/20/02 at 13:18: > | X-Spam-Status is ok with Yes, hits required but how do i get rid > | of the tests= part? > > procmail/formail, or hack the SA code. > > > | I do not want the report at all in the message body how do u get > | rid of this

RE: [SAtalk] Mail Looping problem

It looks like you have an alias pointing to a program that smrsh (sendmail restricted shell) doesn't consider safe. A message goes to cdimascio, which tries to shell out to a program, which generates an error that gets sent to cdimascio (or root/postmaster aliased to cdimascio?), then it all starts

Re: [SAtalk] Bayesian attack

Justin, I expected the HTML parser might deal with the comment block attack. Will it also deal with the "white-on-white text" variant? (you didn't include both scenarios from my original email, so I'm adding the other back in below). I wrote previously: If you strip HTML prior to bayes this cou

[SAtalk] Mail Looping problem

I attempted to setup spamassassin according to the instructions in the documentation I am running sendmail (8.11.0/8.11.6) on a linux machine (Linux 2.2.16-22)   Anyway I now have a looping email message that I cannot stop I removed the .procmailrc file as well as the .forward file from

RE: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary in the future?

I think you're missing the point of the concept. The user maintains a list of people he/she want's email from. If that person subscribes to a list, he puts that into the list and then can get email from that address. The reply feature is just a way for people that are not on the list can "reque

Re: [SAtalk] Bayesian attack

Matt Kettler said: > As a counter argument of this, what about HTML messages being abused to > bypass bayes when only looking at the top N lines? (note: think this is on > the right track in principle, but I can see some resulting holes) > > The spammer could now bypass bayes by inserting a H

[SAtalk] SpamAssassin base64

Hello, I'm new to SpamAssassin and I hope anybody can help me: I have set up qmail-scanner with spamassassin 2.43 successful. SpamAssassin find spam mails correctly but not on base64 encoded mails. Is there an option to decode base64 encoded mails first? Can anybody help me with this?

Re: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary inthe future?

Matt Sergeant wrote: Ronald Wiplinger said the following on 21/11/02 13:50: I just come accross the article at http://slate.msn.com/?id=2074042 which describes that each new sender must first himself identify by answering a return message. I love that idea! Is such a module available within

RE: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary in the future?

> -Original Message- > From: Ronald Wiplinger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 21 November 2002 13:50 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary in > the future? > > I just come accross the article at > http://slate.msn.com/?id=2074042

Re: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary inthe future?

Ronald Wiplinger said the following on 21/11/02 13:50: I just come accross the article at http://slate.msn.com/?id=2074042 which describes that each new sender must first himself identify by answering a return message. I love that idea! Is such a module available within SpamAssassin? I would lik

[SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary in the future?

I just come accross the article at http://slate.msn.com/?id=2074042 which describes that each new sender must first himself identify by answering a return message. I love that idea! Is such a module available within SpamAssassin? I would like the picture methode, rather, than the just reply meth

Re: [SAtalk] .fetchmailrc

On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 12:30:44PM +0100, Denis Ducamp wrote: > Another way is to ask fetchmail to use procmail directly (mda option). For example: in $HOME/.fetchmailrc: set daemon 120 poll pophost.my_domain.com protocol pop3 username "my_account" password "my_password"

Re: [SAtalk] .fetchmailrc

On Thursday 21 November 2002 12:30, Denis Ducamp wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 10:58:34AM +0100, Erik Jakobsen wrote: > > Hi. > > > > I'm using SuSE 8.1, and have installed SA from there. > > I use Kmail. > > How is the .fetchmailrc looking if used with SA ??. > > It isn't fetchmail that locally

Re: [SAtalk] Slashdot Article

Matt Sergeant wrote: Tom Allison said the following on 21/11/02 10:27: "SpamArchive.org has just been launched. SpamArchive.org is a community resource that provides a database of known spam to be used for testing, developing, and benchmarking anti-spam tools. The goal of this project is to

Re: [SAtalk] .fetchmailrc

On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 10:58:34AM +0100, Erik Jakobsen wrote: > Hi. > > I'm using SuSE 8.1, and have installed SA from there. > I use Kmail. > How is the .fetchmailrc looking if used with SA ??. It isn't fetchmail that locally deliver your mail. From your logs, fetchmail send your mails to the l

Re: [SAtalk] Slashdot Article

Tom Allison said the following on 21/11/02 10:27: "SpamArchive.org has just been launched. SpamArchive.org is a community resource that provides a database of known spam to be used for testing, developing, and benchmarking anti-spam tools. The goal of this project is to provide a large reposi

[SAtalk] Slashdot Article

"SpamArchive.org has just been launched. SpamArchive.org is a community resource that provides a database of known spam to be used for testing, developing, and benchmarking anti-spam tools. The goal of this project is to provide a large repository of spam that can be used by researchers and to

[SAtalk] .fetchmailrc

Hi. I'm using SuSE 8.1, and have installed SA from there. I use Kmail. How is the .fetchmailrc looking if used with SA ??. I have some problems. I cannot see any spam indetifikations in any mail comming in here. Here is a print of my /var/log/mail file. Hope some of you can see whats the proble