Something isn't working for me with razor reporting. I'm not sure
exactly what is wrong but when I pipe a message to 'spamassassin -r' I
get a message back saying that reporting needs authentication. I know I
have created an identity successfully as when I pipe the same message to
'razor-report' it
--On Tuesday, November 26, 2002 11:26 AM -0600 "Smart,Dan"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| header RCVD_IN_WIREHUB
rbleval:check_rbl('relay','blackholes.wirehub.net')
| describe RCVD_IN_WIREHUBVMC-Received via a relay in WIREHUB
| score RCVD_IN_WIREHUB 2.0
Couldn't this be altered
Michael Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Out of an evil sense of malice , here's an example of one of their
> falsely included messages which IMO doesn't belong in the corpus - it
> is simply NOT spam per se.
That message doesn't appear to be spam, but it could be. Spammers
often disguise thei
A fair statement as to what it is good for,yes. It could be used for
bayesian body stuff - dunno how that's stacked up in your tests
(which I notice do include most headers) - but it's pretty limited
otherwise.
Note that the PR for these guys (CipherMail or whatever $25000 box
it's called Ironmail
* Michael Bell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Agreed. I think it's worthless too. Just wanted to bring up the
> topic, so we could all be prepared for newbies asking the question.
> Now we have a thread to point to
>
> Here's an example of their substandard corpus. Note that while
> looking for an e
--- Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I haven't looked yet, but
>
> (a) if they're not well-cleaned (ie if there is valid nonspam in
> there),
> it's going to seriously impact the archive's usefulness.
It's not well-cleaned. In a random survey of 5 spam files, one was
clearly a va
"Smart,Dan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Classification: PUBLIC
> If anyone is interested
>
> I run a low/medium volume (35,000/day), site-wide SA corporate installation
> behind Postfix. Here's my local.cf updates that seem to have tuned things
> well for me.
>
> BTW: I kill messages 7.
"Rob MacGregor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd really like to see a blacklist_to option somewhere, or some other
> way of automatically tagging a given destination as indicating 99.99%
> probable spam.
>
> Basically, I've got an email address that I have to have to host some
> web pages on my
Michael Bell said:
> Kinda hard to say. Most of it IS spammy and valid MIME as far as I
> could tell. I did catch a few clearly-non-spam (evite) things in the
> corpus.
>
> The lack of Received lines does mess up quite a few DNS related tests
> (RBL, MX records) but I wouldn't think that alone
Hello. Can anybody help with following troubles? I wrote simple perl
script based on POD documentation for spamassassin:
#!/usr/bin/perl
use Mail::SpamAssassin;
my ($mail, $spamtest, $status, $spamdir);
my $f = new Mail::SpamAssassin();
$f->load_scoreonly_sql ("vl
10 matches
Mail list logo
