[SAtalk] Question on the list of tests

2002-11-26 Thread Rob MacGregor
Some time back I browsed the list of tests so I could tweak the values to suit my own particular situation. Yesterday I did this again but noted that while some descriptions are in English, some are French and some are other languages. This has made understanding the nature of some of the test

Re: [SAtalk] non-native language spam consistantly sneeking through

2002-11-26 Thread Matthew Cline
On Tuesday 26 November 2002 03:48 pm, Ray Dzek wrote: > Is there way to bias the "native" language scores in SA? I have > notice that a significant portion of the spam that is sneeking past > SA is non-english. The bulk of it looks like it is either spanish or > portuguese. In the SA config file,

Re: [SAtalk] non-native language spam consistently sneaking through

2002-11-26 Thread Matt Kettler
read the man Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf page and pay particular attention to the "ok_languages" option (defaults to "any" in 2.4x) At 03:48 PM 11/26/2002 -0800, Ray Dzek wrote: Is there way to bias the "native" language scores in SA? I have notice that a significant portion of the spam that is sne

[SAtalk] always insert report_header???

2002-11-26 Thread John Ruff
I'm new to SpamAssassin and am looking for help with report_headers. I'm using Postfix+Amavisd-new+SpamAssassin(2.43). How can I setup spamassassin to insert a report into the header for every email, regardless if it's spam, tagged-spam, or neither? local.cf: report_header 1 use_terse_r

[SAtalk] non-native language spam consistantly sneeking through

2002-11-26 Thread Ray Dzek
Is there way to bias the "native" language scores in SA? I have notice that a significant portion of the spam that is sneeking past SA is non-english. The bulk of it looks like it is either spanish or portuguese. Thanks --- This SF.net email

Re: [SAtalk] smtpd+spamd

2002-11-26 Thread Justin Mason
James Braid said: > > > I've put together a system using the Juniper smtpd+smtpfwdd daemons > > > and > > > spamd, with a bit of perl glue in between. > > > > On a Juniper box? that *is* cool! That'd be great to write up. > > I think he means this juniper: http://www.obtuse.com/juniper/ :-) a

[SAtalk] Aliases and SQL configuration

2002-11-26 Thread Lindsey Simon
We use SpamAssassin here at our newspaper. Many editors have email aliases like [EMAIL PROTECTED] which points to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and they use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for listserves etc.. The problem is that their configuration using the php/mySQL setup only configures things for username foo. So they

RE: [SAtalk] Setting up spamassassin sitewide with multiple mail servers

2002-11-26 Thread Ben M. VanWagner
My situation is a little different.. im using three different userlists I have installed spamassassin sitewide using spamc through /etc/procmailrc on each mail server but the spamd process is eating up system resources pretty severly on the machines.. which also serve httpd, pop3, imap, radius

RE: [SAtalk] smtpd+spamd

2002-11-26 Thread James Braid
> I've put together a system using the Juniper smtpd+smtpfwdd daemons and > > spamd, with a bit of perl glue in between. > > On a Juniper box? that *is* cool! That'd be great to write up. I think he means this juniper: http://www.obtuse.com/juniper/ :-) Cheers, James --

[SAtalk] OK, this is a strange score.

2002-11-26 Thread Graham Dunn
X-Spam-Score: -2.22044604925031e-16BIG_FONT,HTML_50_70,HTML_FONT_COLOR_YELLOW,HTML_FONT_FACE_ODD,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01 I didn't realize the GA had such precision :] Graham --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T handhe

[SAtalk] FYI: Tweaks made to a great v2.43

2002-11-26 Thread Smart,Dan
Classification: PUBLIC If anyone is interested I run a low/medium volume (35,000/day), site-wide SA corporate installation behind Postfix. Here's my local.cf updates that seem to have tuned things well for me. BTW: I kill messages 7.0 and higher (but carboncopy headers to MBOX). I carbonc

Re: [SAtalk] bouncing as an alternative to /dev/null

2002-11-26 Thread John Rudd
er... that should have been "from or to" not "from or two". --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0002en

Re: [SAtalk] Setting up spamassassin sitewide with multiple mail servers

2002-11-26 Thread Patrick Bores
I run a similar setup with 3 servers and 1 user list (glued together with NIS). It shouldn't be that difficult. 1. Install SA on each machine in a central directory. Mine is "/usr/data/spamassassin" In SA dist directory: perl Makefile.PL PREFIX=/usr/data/spamassassin/usr SYSCONFDIR=/usr/data/s

Re: [SAtalk] bouncing as an alternative to /dev/null

2002-11-26 Thread John Rudd
> From: Martin Schroeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On 2002-11-25 02:29:35 -0800, John Rudd wrote: > > Doesn't matter. If the sender address was false information, then they > > can't appeal the blacklisting (and I don't want them to), but I'll stop > > getting spam from that address (and typically

RE: [SAtalk] Only allow so many emails

2002-11-26 Thread Dallas Engelken
> -Original Message- > From: Jeremy Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 8:11 AM > To: Dev > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Only allow so many emails > > > On Fri, 2002-11-22 at 15:39, Dev wrote: > > Is there a way to set a limit on how many

Re: [SAtalk] smtpd+spamd

2002-11-26 Thread Justin Mason
Ian MacDougall said: > I've put together a system using the Juniper smtpd+smtpfwdd daemons and > spamd, with a bit of perl glue in between. On a Juniper box? that *is* cool! That'd be great to write up. BTW please post it to the news site (http://news.spamassassin.zawodny.com/) if possible, th

Re: [SAtalk] Only allow so many emails

2002-11-26 Thread Jeremy Turner
On Fri, 2002-11-22 at 15:39, Dev wrote: > Is there a way to set a limit on how many emails 1 person can send at once? > For example i want to set it to 25. > > I want to send 50 emails > I can only send 25 people emails at once. > Then i would have to create another email to send another 25 > >

Re: [SAtalk] Using SA on client only (mbox)

2002-11-26 Thread Liudvikas Bukys
Here is a little kludge that I use to refile MH mail (e.g. I refile inbox spam into inbox.suspect). You can process your mbox files by using MH "inc" to extract the messages, and MH "packf" to pack them into mbox format. Your linux box probably has nmh installed already.

Re: [SAtalk] FP and suggestion for new rule.

2002-11-26 Thread Justin Mason
Jon Gabrielson said: > I received a FP today that had the following header: > > X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [192.168.1.20] > X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for > spam. > > I have also noticed other "commercial" filters in headers before. > Would a

Re: [SAtalk] SA with Mailman

2002-11-26 Thread Justin Mason
Kenneth Porter said: > Has anyone used SA with Mailman? How do you set that up? I just started up > a Mailman system and would like to use SA to process submissions and reject > anything that scores as spam. Well, I hear setting up yr mailman list-posting aliases like so list: | spamassassin

RE: [SAtalk] smtpd+spamd

2002-11-26 Thread Ian MacDougall
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 09:43, Kim Leandersson wrote: > Yes! This could be exactly what I'm looking for. We wish to deploy an > SMTP gateway who will filter all mail for spam and viruses. We have > multiple domains, does your configuration manage this? Is there a way to > also scan the mails for viru

Re: [SAtalk] smtpd+spamd

2002-11-26 Thread Ian MacDougall
On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 19:31, Bob Amen wrote: > Ian MacDougall wrote: > > > Hello, (sorry for the disclaimer) > > > > I've put together a system using the Juniper smtpd+smtpfwdd daemons and > > spamd, with a bit of perl glue in between. > > Would this system be worth documenting and making availab

Re: [SAtalk] Using SA on client only (mbox)

2002-11-26 Thread Patrick Lay
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Dan McD wrote: > > I'd like to use SA only on my client (linux-) machine running Pine. > You could configure a local mail server, which is probably already > installed on your Linux box - such as sendmail or postfix - and then use > fetchmail to retrieve your mail and deliver i

Re: [SAtalk] Using SA on client only (mbox)

2002-11-26 Thread Dan McD
Patrick Lay wrote: I'd like to use SA only on my client (linux-) machine running Pine. You have a couple of choices. You could configure a local mail server, which is probably already installed on your Linux box - such as sendmail or postfix - and then use fetchmail to retrieve your mail and

Re: [SAtalk] bouncing as an alternative to /dev/null

2002-11-26 Thread Martin Schroeder
On 2002-11-25 02:29:35 -0800, John Rudd wrote: > Doesn't matter. If the sender address was false information, then they > can't appeal the blacklisting (and I don't want them to), but I'll stop > getting spam from that address (and typically the addresses have been > repetitive). What matters

[SAtalk] spamassassin on Solaris with Perl v5.8.0's Sys::Syslog

2002-11-26 Thread Joost van Baal
Hi, I'm running Mail-SpamAssassin-2.43's spamd on SunOS 5.8 (aka Solaris 8) with Sys::Syslog from Perl v5.8.0, with patch http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg89347.html applied. I had to patch spamd to get things going (patch against my /usr/local/bin/spamd is attached). The original spamd gives me a: #

[SAtalk] Problems using spamd (noob)

2002-11-26 Thread Jakob Breivik Grimstveit
I use Evolution, regular POP3 and spamd (installed & setup as in http://www.spamassassin.org/dist/spamd/README.spamd). I use spamd to reduce wait time when pop3 mail is being downloaded since I get about 400 mails daily when logging in. It's a pain to wait. Right. 1. Is the local ~/.spamassasin/u

Re: [SAtalk] bouncing as an alternative to /dev/null

2002-11-26 Thread Rich Duzenbury
> I don't believe this. I've been using SA for quite awhile and I can't > remember the last FP I got. So, fairly recently, I changed my procmail > setup so that I keep those that score between 5 and 9, everything over nine > goes out the window. About 54% of the spam I get scores more than 9.