Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Jack Gostl
> >> As far as I know this is an open list that allows non-subscribers to > >> post > >> to it. BIG MISTAKE for a list of this nature IMHO. If the list were made > >> "subscriber posting only" then a number of things would happen: > > > > If you think this is a hassle, have some sympathy for the l

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Simon Byrnand
> >> As far as I know this is an open list that allows non-subscribers to >> post >> to it. BIG MISTAKE for a list of this nature IMHO. If the list were made >> "subscriber posting only" then a number of things would happen: > > If you think this is a hassle, have some sympathy for the list manager

Re[2]: [SAtalk] Reporting spam via Theo Van Dinter's Handlespam Problem.

2003-06-01 Thread Chris Evans
On Saturday, May 31, 2003, 9:05:35 PM Theo wrote: TVD> That's going to be the envelope sender. handlespam just calls sendmail, TVD> and unless told otherwise (via -f [EMAIL PROTECTED]), it'll figure out TVD> the from using your username and domain. Or just change the line: my $fromAddr = $ENV{'L

Re: [SAtalk] Prepended SPAM: ?

2003-06-01 Thread Darryl Lee
Argh. Nevermind. I found the local CHANGE file for our systemwide install of SA, and it turns out our sysadmin made a customization: lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm - after 229 (among the other s/// transformations) # MPR 5/12/03 # add prefix to report s/^/SPAM: /gm;

[SAtalk] Prepended SPAM: ?

2003-06-01 Thread Darryl Lee
So I installed 2.5.5 in my user environment, and it was working fine. Interestingly, the SA report did *not* have SPAM: prepended to every line. I didn't customize the report template at all. Shortly thereafter, my web/mailhost installed 2.5.4, including spamd. I decided to start using it, sinc

[SAtalk] Spamd: Option -F 'removed'?

2003-06-01 Thread Murray Alexander
I've searched through archives and documentation, and I can't find any mention of this issue, so I hope nobody minds my asking here. I'm running Exim 3.36 and SpamAssassin 2.55 on a RedHat 8.0 machine.   I've used 'dman's configuration for Exim 3.x (his page is widely referenced, but I can'

Re: [SAtalk] site wide BAYES

2003-06-01 Thread guenther
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 22:30, William Stearns wrote: > Good evening, Guenther, Good morning, William, > > How can I do that? Did not find any note, how to define a site wide > > BAYES database. TIA > > http://www.stearns.org/doc/spamassassin-setup.current.html#autoreporting Now that page looks

Re: [SAtalk] sa-learn in 2.55 can't really force expire?

2003-06-01 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 06:54:37PM -0500, Stewart, John wrote: > So this explains what happens if the DB gets too *small*. But what governs > how *big* the database can get? Would it just be big enough to contain the > last 500,000 seen tokens? Would this be a problem for performance/DB size? Noth

Re: [SAtalk] Spamassassin Milter ? [Partially OT]

2003-06-01 Thread Patrick Morris
MIMEdefang'll do everything you mentioned, and it's a (relative) snap to set up. Cassandra Lynette Brockett wrote: I'm looking at implementing a milter in sendmail that passes the email through spamassassin but allows us to reject at mta level if the sa rating is over a certain level (e.g. 30+ o

Re: [SAtalk] Evolution and SPAM Assassin

2003-06-01 Thread guenther
> My problem (such as it is) is using the system wide spam and ham traps. > My emailer is Evolution, and to bounce the message, I need at minimum > > What I would like to do is automate this, perhaps with the use of a > filter. Procmail springs to mind, but I have not thought things through >

[SAtalk] Spamassassin Milter ? [Partially OT]

2003-06-01 Thread Cassandra Lynette Brockett
I'm looking at implementing a milter in sendmail that passes the email through spamassassin but allows us to reject at mta level if the sa rating is over a certain level (e.g. 30+ or something like that). Now, my question is simple - has anyone else got a milter running that does that? I would ra

[SAtalk] Evolution and SPAM Assassin

2003-06-01 Thread S. Anthony Sequeira
[Please do NOT cc me, I am a subscriber to the list] I have spent a few days configuring my system to use SA and Razor. Once I found Bill Stearns excellent reference document, it was a (relative) breeze. My problem (such as it is) is using the system wide spam and ham traps. My emailer is Evol

Re: [SAtalk] Spamd not working anymore

2003-06-01 Thread Jack Gostl
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Simon Byrnand wrote: > > Jack Gostl wrote: > > > >>On Sat, 31 May 2003, Steve Wilson wrote: > >> > >>>My /home/$user/.procmail/rules.rc file is: > >>>:0fw > >>>| /usr/bin/spamc > >>>:0: > >>>* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes > >>>SPAM > >>>--- > >>>That now works only if I change l

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Jack Gostl
> As far as I know this is an open list that allows non-subscribers to post > to it. BIG MISTAKE for a list of this nature IMHO. If the list were made > "subscriber posting only" then a number of things would happen: If you think this is a hassle, have some sympathy for the list manager who has t

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes R/O no auto learn

2003-06-01 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 01:44:49AM +0100, urbanbuda wrote: > The lines I am concerned about are the bayes tie-ing to DB file R/O, all > other logs I have seen posted here always show this as R/W as does the > auto-whitelist entry when it appears in my spamd output. What am I missing? In check mode

[SAtalk] Bayes R/O no auto learn

2003-06-01 Thread urbanbuda
I have auto_learn 1 in my local.cf but I dont appear to be learning any new spam in bayes. Checking the contents shows I am not quite up with my ham side yet but over o the spam. But the number of messages learned is from using sa-learn. spamassassin -D --lint shows the following strangeness debug

Re: [SAtalk] SA on *n*x mail gateways protecting MSExchange Servers

2003-06-01 Thread Mike Leone
Patrick Morris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) had this to say on 05/29/03 at 23:23: > This may be a silly question -- but why not just have Sendmail do the > LDAP account lookup itself (using the LDAP_ROUTING feature)? Seems like > it'd be quite a bit less overhead to deal with than passing stuff to a >

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Per Björklund
Or, if people exclude this list when replying to anyone who for whatever reason send a complaint about spamassassin disrupting service or whatever... I don't see any reason for anyone to include the list in a reply?... / Per -Original Message- From: Simon Byrnand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTE

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Thomas Cameron
To be honest, I imagine the OP just doesn't get it, and quite possibly never will. I really just wanted to reply with something other than insults. I too have seen several of these messages posted to this list. I have been pretty appalled at how nasty many of the replies are. I have noticed muc

[SAtalk] Interesting SA 2.55 issue

2003-06-01 Thread Abel Jeffcoat
Hello, I'm using SA 2.55 on a Red Hat 7.3 Box running Qmail. I just came a cross something interesting. I place the following line in my .qmail files: | Ifspamh e-mail-spam. So, the e-mail gets filtered through SA, and if it is spam it gets sent to x address. Please look at the bottom of this

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Simon Byrnand
> Hi Keoki - > > You should probably talk to your system administrator or your ISP, > whomever > handles your e-mail service. The mailing list you sent your message to is > for people who use and develop SpamAssassin. There is little chance that > anyone on this list has anything to do with your

Re: [SAtalk] Getting spamd to start on boot.

2003-06-01 Thread Cassandra Lynette Brockett
I don't see what the problem is here. I compiled spamassassin via "rpm -tb " to give me rpm's to install, and spamassassin is controlled via "chkconfig spamassassin on" and service spamassassin start/stop/restart works fine. If you are running a rhat box, you really should install all possible pa

Re: [SAtalk] Spamd not working anymore

2003-06-01 Thread Simon Byrnand
> Jack Gostl wrote: > >>On Sat, 31 May 2003, Steve Wilson wrote: >> >>>My /home/$user/.procmail/rules.rc file is: >>>:0fw >>>| /usr/bin/spamc >>>:0: >>>* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes >>>SPAM >>>--- >>>That now works only if I change line2 to /usr/bin/spamassassin. >>> >>>This isn't a terribly big sy

[SAtalk] keeping local copies of outbound email using SA

2003-06-01 Thread Michael Weiner
I have a somewhat simple question, i hope someone can answer for me. I am currently using spamassassin-2.53 on a mail server and all it does is handle all incoming smtp traffic for a mail server sitting behind it, run its scans, and then passes it back to the other mail server. Everything is w

Re: [SAtalk] site wide BAYES

2003-06-01 Thread William Stearns
Good evening, Guenther, On 30 May 2003, guenther wrote: > How can I do that? Did not find any note, how to define a site wide > BAYES database. TIA http://www.stearns.org/doc/spamassassin-setup.current.html#autoreporting Cheers, - Bill --

Re: [SAtalk] Advice Please

2003-06-01 Thread Stuart Gall
- Original Message - From: "Vivek Khera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:08 PM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Advice Please > > "AL" == Alan Leghart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > AL> to use different encoding (although, IIRC, it's not base-64 by >

Re: [SAtalk] New doc: Postfix + site-wide SpamAssassin + Procmail for individual 'spam' mailboxes

2003-06-01 Thread Alex van den Bogaerdt
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 02:57:16PM -0700, Greg Webster wrote: > 3. As root, create a file at /usr/bin/postfixfilter with the following > content: #!/bin/bash >/usr/bin/spamc | /usr/sbin/sendmail -i "$@" >exit $? [...] > 7. In /etc/postfix/master.cf in the "Services" section, alter the

Re: [SAtalk] Getting spamd to start on boot.

2003-06-01 Thread Stuart Gall
- Original Message - From: "John Lang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 1:01 AM Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Getting spamd to start on boot. > When I run chkconfig --list, spamd does not show up. > When I run chkconfig --list spamd, I get the following: > s

Re: [SAtalk] Re: site wide BAYES

2003-06-01 Thread guenther
> This is probably NOT a good idea (in general). > > Not everyone at your site will classify the same message in the same way. > One or some of them may want to receive mortgage, hgh, viagra, or other > home shopping spam in their "inbox". If you "know" all your users to make > this decision for

Re: [SAtalk] site wide BAYES

2003-06-01 Thread guenther
> >Would it be wise (actually, would it do any harm) to have one BAYES > >database for a whole site, instead of per-user basis? (Just a hand full > >of users.) > > There are some advantages and some drawbacks here. On the advantage side as > it learns from the spam of one user it can apply those

Re: [SAtalk] Reporting spam via Theo Van Dinter's Handlespam Problem.

2003-06-01 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 11:49:05PM +0100, Jim Ford wrote: > reports (to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) are getting bounced with the error 'Domain of > sender address does not exist', with my own local 'domain' and login name > quoted. I suspect this is a sendmail issue and as I don't have a clue how to > fix i

Re: [SAtalk] Reporting spam via Theo Van Dinter's Handlespam Problem.

2003-06-01 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 05:31:32PM +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > can you give a URL? I must have overlooked it getting mentioned anywhere. I usually mention it on the list occasionally. http://www.kluge.net/~felicity/random/handlespam.txt Basically it'll take an mbox file and run each message thr

Re: [SAtalk] Ok... I missed something.....

2003-06-01 Thread Jon Reynolds
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 10:01, Kirk Moore wrote: > I just upgraded to 2.55 and now the *SPAM* is not longer showing > on the subject line. I see a small note, and somewhat have searched > through 4000+ messages. > > Here's the idiot question. did I miss something... I moved from 2.50 >

[SAtalk] Ok... I missed something.....

2003-06-01 Thread Kirk Moore
I just upgraded to 2.55 and now the *SPAM* is not longer showing on the subject line. I see a small note, and somewhat have searched through 4000+ messages. Here's the idiot question. did I miss something... I moved from 2.50 to 2.55 -- Kirk Moore Network/Software Engineer www.clean

[SAtalk] my procmailrc (with sa-learning of FPs and FNs)

2003-06-01 Thread Duncan Findlay
I've mentioned from time to time that I'd post my procmailrc to this list. Here's how it works... all my mail goes through spamassassin. If it is a false positive, or false negative, I "bounce" it to daf-ham or daf-spam (respectively) My account name on my box is daf. You will want to change this

RE: [SAtalk] Ham/spam aliases

2003-06-01 Thread Andrew Joakimsen
Thanks for that link. I had posted a while back to the list and never recieved any worthwhile information. Bellsouth AFAIK uses the brightmail spam system which does a similar thing for reporting spam messages. -Mensaje original- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] nombre de W

Re: [SAtalk] New doc: Postfix + site-wide SpamAssassin + Procmailfor individual 'spam' mailboxes

2003-06-01 Thread Bob Apthorpe
On Sat, 31 May 2003 09:09:25 -0700 (PDT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Robin wrote: > > > could you describe an alternative scenario using cyrus > > > > Sorry, I know absolutely nothing about cyrus. That seems par for the course - between Cyrus and LDAP, it seems nobody can/will explain how to set

RE: [SAtalk] Re: Forwarding ham to another mailbox (using .forward)

2003-06-01 Thread Gary Funck
> > Also, you don't need the spamassassin.lock file > [this avoids the lock fiile] > ;0fw > | /usr/bin/spamassassin > Yeah, the lock file is recommended in the SA docs. as I recall, to keep from creating too many processes (ie, to serialize spamassassin calls on a per-user basis). Since procm

Re: [SAtalk] Ham/spam aliases

2003-06-01 Thread Matt Kettler
At 12:37 PM 5/31/2003 -0400, William Stearns wrote: God afternoon, (LuKreme?), On Sat, 31 May 2003, LuKreme wrote: > Has anyone setup local mail aliases for ham and spam? > > What I want is when someone receives a mail that is spam but not marked > by SA, they "redirect" the message to a "this-is

Re: [SAtalk] Ham/spam aliases

2003-06-01 Thread William Stearns
God afternoon, (LuKreme?), On Sat, 31 May 2003, LuKreme wrote: > Has anyone setup local mail aliases for ham and spam? > > What I want is when someone receives a mail that is spam but not marked > by SA, they "redirect" the message to a "this-is-spam" email alias, > which then runs it through

Re: [SAtalk] spam message being delivered

2003-06-01 Thread Ted Fiedler
is there a rule grabbing it and saying that its OK to deliver before any other rules get processed? for example I had [EMAIL PROTECTED] in my user_prefs as a whitelist item and I was sending test messages full of high scoring spam goodness and they were being delivered to the mailbox sent to instea

RE: [SAtalk] OT: Exchange / Outlook Rule Deployment

2003-06-01 Thread Ron Poserina Jr.
Thanks for all the good info guys, will investigate the feasability on my end. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 8:45 AM To: Stewart, John; Ron Poserina Jr.; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [SAtalk] OT: Exchange / Outlook Rule Deplo

Re: [SAtalk] New doc: Postfix + site-wide SpamAssassin + Procmail for individual 'spam' mailboxes

2003-06-01 Thread greg
Sorry, I know absolutely nothing about cyrus. Greg > could you describe an alternative scenario using cyrus > > On Fri, 30 May 2003, Greg Webster wrote: > >> Hello, SpamAssassin mailing list :) >> >> Some new documentation I've created. I'll be placing this online, but >> figured I'd post it her

[SAtalk] Re: Forwarding ham to another mailbox (using .forward)

2003-06-01 Thread LuKreme
On Thursday, May 8, 2003, at 10:58 Canada/Mountain, Bill Horsman wrote: On Thu, 2003-05-08 at 17:22, Theo Van Dinter wrote: On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 05:12:34PM +0100, Bill Horsman wrote: But my question is: how do I get SA to forward just ham mail to my bill-cp mailbox? Add a rule to your procmailrc

[SAtalk] spam message being delivered

2003-06-01 Thread Damian Mendoza
Hi, I found a couple of messages that had a score of 5.8 - "5" being my default SPAM level. They were delivered to the end-user, however they should have been quarantined. Using SA 2.52 and MailScanner 4.12-2 Any ideas? Thanks, Damian --

[SAtalk] Ham/spam aliases

2003-06-01 Thread LuKreme
Has anyone setup local mail aliases for ham and spam? What I want is when someone receives a mail that is spam but not marked by SA, they "redirect" the message to a "this-is-spam" email alias, which then runs it through sa-learn -spam similarly, there would be a "this-is-ham" address for sa-le

Re: [SAtalk] Reporting spam via Theo Van Dinter's Handlespam Problem.

2003-06-01 Thread Kai Schaetzl
Jim Ford wrote on Thu, 29 May 2003 23:49:05 +0100: > Theo Van Dinter's Handlespam > can you give a URL? I must have overlooked it getting mentioned anywhere. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com IE-Center: http://ie5.de & h

Re: [SAtalk] Spamd not working anymore

2003-06-01 Thread Steve Wilson
Jack Gostl wrote: On Sat, 31 May 2003, Steve Wilson wrote: My /home/$user/.procmail/rules.rc file is: :0fw | /usr/bin/spamc :0: * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes SPAM --- That now works only if I change line2 to /usr/bin/spamassassin. This isn't a terribly big system here, so I suppose I could get

[SAtalk] some errors related to spamassassin?

2003-06-01 Thread Ted Fiedler
I am testing spamassassin at home for possible use at work, where there are 1000+ users as opposed to one. I keep seeing two errors in particular popping up and Im not even sure if they are worth worrying about as, I beleive Ive come up with a solution for one... anyway. Im running spamassassin on

Re: [SAtalk] Whitelist not working as expected.

2003-06-01 Thread Jack Gostl
I'm going to repost a message from Gary Funck that solves this nicely. I've been running it for awhile and it works like a charm. -- >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu May 29 08:08:49 2003 Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 20:56:10 -0700 From: Gary Funck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: SpamAssassin listserve <[E

Re: [SAtalk] Spamd not working anymore

2003-06-01 Thread Steve Wilson
Jack Gostl wrote: My /home/$user/.procmail/rules.rc file is: :0fw | /usr/bin/spamc :0: * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes SPAM --- That now works only if I change line2 to /usr/bin/spamassassin. This isn't a terribly big system here, so I suppose I could get away with that, but I'd much prefer to u