For the occasional false positives, I would like to have an automated method to "clean" the SA tags.
My thought was to create a mailbox with a procmail recipe to clean the email and return it to the sender. It might look
something like:
:0 fw
|spamassassin -d
:0:
#code to return mail to sender??
whitelist_to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 4:11 PM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: [SAtalk] Whitelisting mailing lists
|
|
| Hi,
|
| I want to whitelist
Hi,
I want to whitelist some mailing lists, here's a sample header:
Received: from dim.dagupan.com [202.91.161.139] by rasserv.dagupan.com with
ESMTP
(SMTPD32-5.05) id AC6F39200FC; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:56:15 +0800
Received: by dim.dagupan.com (Postfix, from userid 1013)
id 968C11570EF; Wed, 4
John,
| Perhaps this is a bit outside the scope of this group, but I'd appreciate
| any assistance in digging through my mail logs.
|
| I'm trying to follow Scott Henderson's Spamfilter relay server "Howto"
| http://www.geocities.com/scottlhenderson/spamfilter.html as applied to
| RedHat 8.0 alo
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Mike Burger said the following on 04/12/02 15:21:
>
> > Haven't run into that problem on any of the 5 or 6 systems on which I run
> > spamd...including 2 fairly high traffic systems.
>
> None of my computers have ever been hacked into. But I sure as he
I suppose it could also be run from inittab, too...if it dies, inittab
would create a new instance.
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Martin Schroeder wrote:
> On 2002-12-04 13:22:04 +, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > spamd; done". And what do you do when it decides to gobble all available
> > memory?
>
> You
Bob Apthorpe wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Rich Puhek wrote:
I patched my spamd to check to see if the free memory is high enough
before spawning a new process. Worked great, but I haven't found a nice
protable way to do it (depends on /proc). If you can find a way to
determine free RAM in S
I'm sorry,
> Is there a way to set a global whitelist for SpamAssassin?
Thank's
Ronan
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Visual Studio.NET
comprehensive development tool, built to increase your
productivity. Try a free online h
On 2002-12-04 13:22:04 +, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> spamd; done". And what do you do when it decides to gobble all available
> memory?
You can run it ulimited.
Best regards
Martin
--
http://www.tm.oneiros.de/calendar/2003/
Hello,
Is there a way to set a global white for SpamAssassin?
Thank's
Ronan
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Visual Studio.NET
comprehensive development tool, built to increase your
productivity. Try a free online hosted sess
Hi,
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Rich Puhek wrote:
> I patched my spamd to check to see if the free memory is high enough
> before spawning a new process. Worked great, but I haven't found a nice
> protable way to do it (depends on /proc). If you can find a way to
> determine free RAM in Solaris, that met
Allison, Thomas said:
> This is great, thanks so much.
>
> I've been looking at bogofilter for a while and they have a number of
> options that I hope will be somewhat replicated in SpamAssassin:
>
> bogofilter options:
> -u update database(s) while scoring
> -s record as known spam
> -n reco
I patched my spamd to check to see if the free memory is high enough
before spawning a new process. Worked great, but I haven't found a nice
protable way to do it (depends on /proc). If you can find a way to
determine free RAM in Solaris, that method should work great for you as
well.
--Rich
--On Wednesday, December 4, 2002 11:13 AM -0500 "Allison, Thomas"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| I've been looking at bogofilter for a while and they have a number of
| options that I hope will be somewhat replicated in SpamAssassin:
Could perhaps SA simply call bogofilter?
Amos
-
This is great, thanks so much.
I've been looking at bogofilter for a while and they have a number of
options that I hope will be somewhat replicated in SpamAssassin:
bogofilter options:
-u update database(s) while scoring
-s record as known spam
-n record as known non-spam
-S subtract from no
Matt Sergeant said:
> There are a fair few so-called "right hand side" blacklists (taken from
> the fact that they use the rhs of the email address), but they're
> focussed on blocking based on what is given in the MAIL FROM line. I'm
> sure they could extend themselves to work on domains used
Mike Burger said the following on 04/12/02 15:21:
Haven't run into that problem on any of the 5 or 6 systems on which I run
spamd...including 2 fairly high traffic systems.
None of my computers have ever been hacked into. But I sure as hell take
precautions to make sure it doesn't happen.
Exp
Brandon,
Please contact me on this.
Thanks
Michael
FROM: Brandon LehmannDATE: 10/31/2002 10:01:26SUBJECT: [SAtalk] Automated
Site-wide installation using qmail + vpopmail + spamass Hello once again
list,
A while back I had posted that I was in the works of creating a
fully automated
Jon Gabrielson said:
> To my knowledge, spamassassin only uses blacklists on
> headers, i think that it should use it on urls in the body as well.
> EVERY piece of spam out there has contact info, or they can't
> sell their product, and that contact info is probably one of the hardest
> things t
> Justin Mason wrote:
> > BTW, just met with some researchers in Trinity College here in Dublin for
> > lunch, an AI guy and a distributed-systems peer-to-peer guy, they're
> > *both* looking at starting anti-spam projects.
> >
> > So, wondering -- does anyone have good ideas for new systems in tho
Allison, Thomas said:
> I was looking at the spamassassin.org pages and wasn't certain of two things
> related to the Bayesian filters:
>
> 1) you reference including Bayesian filters by "BAYES_*" rules. I couldn't
> find anything else that elaborates on the wildcard '*'
(cc'ed to -talk to answ
Jon Gabrielson said the following on 04/12/02 14:52:
To my knowledge, spamassassin only uses blacklists on
headers, i think that it should use it on urls in the body as well.
EVERY piece of spam out there has contact info, or they can't
sell their product, and that contact info is probably one of
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Mike Burger said the following on 04/12/02 12:37:
> > On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> >
> >
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] said the following on 03/12/02 22:23:
> >>
> >>>On that note, is it best to just run spamd standalone in the background or
> >>>
To my knowledge, spamassassin only uses blacklists on
headers, i think that it should use it on urls in the body as well.
EVERY piece of spam out there has contact info, or they can't
sell their product, and that contact info is probably one of the hardest
things to keep changing. If there were b
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 06:03:33AM -0500, Tom Allison wrote:
> I have version 2.43.
> Where are the BAYES filter settings?
> How do I configure them.
Bayes is a 2.50 (CVS/development) feature. You shouldn't run 2.50 unless
you like living on the edge.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"It timed me
> Justin Mason wrote:
> > BTW, just met with some researchers in Trinity College here in Dublin for
> > lunch, an AI guy and a distributed-systems peer-to-peer guy, they're
> > *both* looking at starting anti-spam projects.
> >
> > So, wondering -- does anyone have good ideas for new systems in tho
Mike Burger said the following on 04/12/02 12:37:
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Matt Sergeant wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said the following on 03/12/02 22:23:
On that note, is it best to just run spamd standalone in the background or
inetd (not interested in using daemontools unless it's really needed).
For some reason, emails sent from *.teledailypromotionslist1090009.com
or *.teledaily1234promotions430349list1090009.com don't raise the
FROM_HAS_MIXED_NUMS flag. Does the FROM_HAS_MIXED_NUMS check the entire
FROM header or just the userid that precedes the @ symbol?
Joe
---
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said the following on 03/12/02 22:23:
> > On that note, is it best to just run spamd standalone in the background or
> > inetd (not interested in using daemontools unless it's really needed). It
> > seems to like standalone fine, but I
I have version 2.43.
Where are the BAYES filter settings?
How do I configure them.
--
"Remember, extremism in the nondefense of moderation is not a virtue."
-- Peter Neumann, about usenet
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Visual
Justin Mason wrote:
BTW, just met with some researchers in Trinity College here in Dublin for
lunch, an AI guy and a distributed-systems peer-to-peer guy, they're
*both* looking at starting anti-spam projects.
So, wondering -- does anyone have good ideas for new systems in those
areas, that can h
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said the following on 03/12/02 22:23:
Thanks for the help, Mike, Matt and Dave! I misunderstood the
qmail-scanner docs to mean that SA just needed to be installed properly.
not that spamd needed to be running.
On that note, is it best to just run spamd standalone in the backgro
Hi all,
I found this in my maillog, what should be this error all about and how do I
fix it? I am using SpamAssassin-2.50cvs on redhat 7.2 machine.
-snip-
Dec 4 15:56:43 mailserver spamd[21401]: connection from localhost
[127.0.0.1] at port 39918
Dec 4 15:56:43 mailserve
33 matches
Mail list logo
