RE: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin strips out headers added by Communigate (was re: Help Spamassassin for Communigate Pro)

At 21:18 9/06/03 -0700, Aaron wrote: > The problem is that the script that you're using with > Communigate *assumes* that the X-Envelope headers will remain > intact, most likely because that script was written before SA > 2.50 when report_safe was introduced. > > Most mailserver configurations

[SAtalk] 237448 Fw: PROTECT YOUR COMPUTER AGAINST HARMFUL VIRUSES! 1261496996

Title: Norton SystemWorks 2003 Software Suite Professional Edition Five Feature-Packed Utilities Norton SystemWorks 2003 Software Suite Professional Edition Five Feature-Packed Utilities, One Great Price A $300 Combined Retail Value for Only $38.95!! * 538507728 ** Norton AntiVir

RE: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin strips out headers added by Communigate (was re: Help Spamassassin for Communigate Pro)

> The problem is that the script that you're using with > Communigate *assumes* that the X-Envelope headers will remain > intact, most likely because that script was written before SA > 2.50 when report_safe was introduced. > > Most mailserver configurations don't rely on message headers > t

RE: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin strips out headers added by Communigate (was re: Help Spamassassin for Communigate Pro)

At 20:05 9/06/03 -0700, Aaron wrote: My mistake. It only removes those headers if report_safe is set to 1. When set to zero, even though the message is spam, the headers remain intact. I think I knew that, but my brain farted there when I was writing that email. :) :) At any rate, this is

RE: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

Sorry, Learned something new today ;-) All other lists that I am signed-up on place the reply-to back to the list for the convenience. My mail server is MDaemon and it has an option which I had checked (not checked by default) that will create a reply-to if one it not found. Notin' like a good b

RE: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin strips out headers added by Communigate (was re: Help Spamassassin for Communigate Pro)

My mistake.  It only removes those headers if report_safe is set to 1.  When set to zero, even though the message is spam, the headers remain intact.  I think I knew that, but my brain farted there when I was writing that email. :)   At any rate, this is verified by taking a raw message wit

Re: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

On Monday 09 June 2003 06:13 pm, Ben Johansen wrote: > So then this list is not setup properly because it is not even issuing a > Reply-To: Header. > My Mail server is placing one in there to make up for this discrepency No. The list has a Reply-To header, set to the original sender, as is good an

RE: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrongaddress?

At 06:13 PM 6/9/03 -0700, Ben Johansen wrote: So then this list is not setup properly because it is not even issuing a Reply-To: Header. My Mail server is placing one in there to make up for this discrepency *cough* Read Yer RFC's man RFC 2822 Section 3.6.2 is VERY clear about all this. http://rfc-

Re: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin strips out headers added by Communigate (was re: Help Spamassassin for Communigate Pro)

At 11:14 9/06/03 -0700, Aaron wrote: I saw that in my own testing.   Here's the work flow:   - Communigate calls a "spamprep" program that adds the proper envelope-to and from headers to the message file itself and deletes the original   - SpamAssassin scans that temp file with the added headers.

RE: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

At 18:13 9/06/03 -0700, Ben Johansen wrote: So then this list is not setup properly because it is not even issuing a Reply-To: Header. My Mail server is placing one in there to make up for this discrepency Reply-To: is an *optional* header. It is not the job of a mailing list to add one, it is t

RE: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

So then this list is not setup properly because it is not even issuing a Reply-To: Header. My Mail server is placing one in there to make up for this discrepency Ben Johansen - http://www.pcforge.com Authorized Witango Reseller http://www.pcforge.com/WitangoGoodies.htm Authorized MDaemon Mail Ser

Re: [SAtalk] kinda OT - amavis & spamd logging

Jonathan Nichols wrote: Hey all, I'm using spamd/SpamAssassin 2.54, and amavis - all from the Gentoo Linux ebuilds. i also tossed Anomy mail tools into the mix and although everything appears to be working great, spamd isn't logging to /var/log/mail/current anymore. Here's what I see in the

Re: [SAtalk] [kinda OT]! - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin")

At 05:25 PM 6/9/2003 -0700, Jonathan Nichols wrote: They do? Really? I ordered a T1 circuit from them on the 2nd of this month and they told me that they don't delegate reverse DNS to customers. =/ My current provider does, but I used to work with most of the NOC engineers at another ISP. AFAIK

RE: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

That's weird... I don't even see a reply-to: header in emails from this list. When I reply, it goes to the "from" address, which is the person who sent it. I have to type in the list address by hand (I know... How sad is that?) I use Outlook 2003 beta, but still, viewing the raw message at the s

Re: [SAtalk] Little bayes question

At 07:53 PM 6/9/2003 -0400, Jose M.Herrera wrote: On Friday 06 June 2003 11:29, Germán D. Staltari wrote: > It could be global or for each user. Better results when is applied for > each user. How I do that?... I know train bayes but for each user.. Thanks you can force bayes to use a single site-

Re: [SAtalk] [kinda OT]! - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "Ihate SpamAsssassin")

Jonathan Nichols wrote: Yes. Speakeasy are the most sweet, lovely and clueful people ever to do the ISP thang. They dole out static IPs (and even, as I discovered to my delight last week, let you set your own reverse DNS on them), encourage They do? Really? I ordered a T1 circuit from them on

Re: [SAtalk] help spamassassin for communigatepro

On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, rons wrote: > I am having the following problem please help. > > A real live spam met the "Any Recipient" parameter with my address being in the list > of recipients (and thus passing the [EMAIL PROTECTED] paramer). However there were > several other addresses (with domains o

[SAtalk] kinda OT - amavis & spamd logging

Hey all, I'm using spamd/SpamAssassin 2.54, and amavis - all from the Gentoo Linux ebuilds. i also tossed Anomy mail tools into the mix and although everything appears to be working great, spamd isn't logging to /var/log/mail/current anymore. Here's what I see in the logs: Jun 9 17:42:43 [pos

RE: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrongaddress?

On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Ben Johansen wrote: > Ok, Here is an example of the headers I receive from a normal post from > the list. > > If I click the Reply button, I get spamassassin-talk-admin > > Is this a M$ LookOut thing ;-) Need you ask? :-) I'd be willing to bet Mason's next paycheck that it

RE: [SAtalk] I hate Mandatory Mail Filtering!!!! - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin")

At 14:33 9/06/03 -0700, L. Walsh wrote: But this also misses the point -- mandatory filtering is *bad*. I should be able to receive my email without it first going into a possibly 2-3 hour back-logged queue waiting to be filtered before it is sent to me. My account alone can easily get 1

[SAtalk] Re: Disregard - Notes regarding success with snort 2.0 on lowend hardware

Sorry.. mis-posted again.. I do that way tooo often :( --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best thread debugger on the planet. Designed with thread debugging features you've never dreamed of, try TotalVie

Re: [SAtalk] [kinda OT]! - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin")

On Mon, 09 Jun 2003 17:25:40 -0700, you wrote: >They do? Really? I ordered a T1 circuit from them on the 2nd of this >month and they told me that they don't delegate reverse DNS to >customers. =/ I find that *very* surprising. Residential customers, at least, have a HOWTO on speakeasy's webs

[SAtalk] timeout before data read

I am getting the error "timeout before data read" from spamassassin. At first the error was coming 1 second after a message was received. On the suggestion of someone I added "score RCVD_IN_ORBS 0" to local.cf, which didn't change the behavior. I then up'ed the timeout in my sendmail.mc to 2 minut

[SAtalk] Notes regarding success with snort 2.0 on low end hardware

I just got done upgrading my snort box to merely "low end" instead of "really low end" hardware. However, I thought some of you might find it interesting that I was successfully running snort 2.0 on an old box with relatively low packet loss (just under 0.1%) sniffing a modestly loaded 2mbit sy

RE: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

At 16:30 9/06/03 -0700, Ben Johansen wrote: Ok, Here is an example of the headers I receive from a normal post from the list. If I click the Reply button, I get spamassassin-talk-admin Is this a M$ LookOut thing ;-) --- Subject: [SAtalk] OT: AOL to Offer Security, Spam Tools Sender: [EMAIL PRO

Re: [SAtalk] Re: MTAs and whitelists - an API exists

Mark Martinec said: > (an extra argument to Mail::SpamAssassin::NoMailAudit::new would be cleaner, > e.g. (data => [EMAIL PROTECTED], add_From_line => 0, > sender => $sender, recips => [EMAIL PROTECTED]); > but I can live with X-Envelope... :) yeah. I would probably add a new arg for "met

[SAtalk] [kinda OT]! - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin")

Yes. Speakeasy are the most sweet, lovely and clueful people ever to do the ISP thang. They dole out static IPs (and even, as I discovered to my delight last week, let you set your own reverse DNS on them), encourage They do? Really? I ordered a T1 circuit from them on the 2nd of this month and

Re: [SAtalk] Little bayes question

On Friday 06 June 2003 11:29, Germán D. Staltari wrote: > It could be global or for each user. Better results when is applied for > each user. How I do that?... I know train bayes but for each user.. Thanks --- This SF.net email is sponsored

[SAtalk] Re: MTAs and whitelists - an API exists

| Oh -- BTW -- something occurred to me. There *IS* an API that | milter/MTA-plugin developers can use to specify this info to SpamAssassin, | after all. It's just implicit and hadn't occurred to me before. | | Our all_spam_to, etc. black/whitelisting code will check the following | headers, s

RE: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

Ok, Here is an example of the headers I receive from a normal post from the list. If I click the Reply button, I get spamassassin-talk-admin Is this a M$ LookOut thing ;-) --- Subject: [SAtalk] OT: AOL to Offer Security, Spam Tools Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-BeenTh

Re: [SAtalk] I hate Mandatory Mail Filtering!!!! - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin")

On Mon, 9 Jun 2003 19:19:32 -0400, you wrote: >Yes. Speakeasy are the most sweet, lovely and clueful people ever to do the >ISP thang. They dole out static IPs (and even, as I discovered to my >delight last week, let you set your own reverse DNS on them), encourage >sharing your wireless access,

Re: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

At 03:27 PM 6/9/2003 -0700, you wrote: This list is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not [EMAIL PROTECTED] So Why is the reply-to set to this Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Actually, it looks to me like the MUA is setting the Reply-To header, not the list processor. I base this on the fact that your messages have y

Re: [SAtalk] I hate Mandatory Mail Filtering!!!! - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin")

I've been staying out of this (horribly off-topic) discussion, but I just wanted to follow up to this. Kenneth Porter wrote: > Isn't SpeakEasy supposed to be server-friendly and linux-friendly? Yes. Speakeasy are the most sweet, lovely and clueful people ever to do the ISP thang. They dole out

Re: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

Ben Johansen said: > This list is [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Not [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > So Why is the reply-to set to this > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's not. Something on your end is mangling the mail. viz the headers I see: Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrongaddress?

--On Monday, June 09, 2003 3:27 PM -0700 Ben Johansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This list is [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Not [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > So Why is the reply-to set to this > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's what I see in the heade

Re: [SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

Ben Johansen wrote: > So Why is the reply-to set to this > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It isn't. HTH. HAND. rOD. -- :: rODbegbie :: http://www.groovymother.com/ :: So what do you do? Oh yeah, I wait tables too. No, I haven't heard your band, cause you guys are pretty new ---

Re: [SAtalk] Question about sa-learn

On Monday 09 June 2003 07:31, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > Not sure, since you don't explain the problem you have. Your sitewide bayes > db needs to be 666, so that all users can write to it, otherwise > auto-learning would fail f.i. Is that what you wanted to know? If *you* > want to train it you can ju

Re: [SAtalk] I hate Mandatory Mail Filtering!!!! - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin")

- Original Message - From: "Kenneth Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:45 PM Subject: RE: [SAtalk] I hate Mandatory Mail Filtering - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin") > --On Monday, June 09, 2003 2:33 PM -0700 "L.

Re: [SAtalk] OT: AOL to Offer Security, Spam Tools

AOL is now trying to offset a slump in advertising and contraction in its dial-up subscriber base with paid features and its new bring-your-own-access service for high-speed Internet users. [...] Wow, sounds like they're trying to fight off MSN & "The Butterfly" for a while longer in addition to l

Re: [SAtalk] Gibberish email addresses

On Jun 09 01:18, Chris Barnes wrote: > Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is testing for gibberish in email address worth attempting? > > Just a quick note: alot of universities use an automated scheme for the > email addresses they give their students. For example, for the longest > time my e

[SAtalk] OT: AOL to Offer Security, Spam Tools

Perhaps appropos: Next Version of AOL to Offer Security, Spam Tools Mon Jun 9,11:51 AM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - America Online said on Monday the next version of its Internet service, to be releas

[SAtalk] Why is this lists Reply-To: Header set to the wrong address?

This list is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not [EMAIL PROTECTED] So Why is the reply-to set to this Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ben Johansen --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best thread debugger on the planet. Desi

RE: [SAtalk] I hate Mandatory Mail Filtering!!!! - speakeasy.net bitesthe dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin")

--On Monday, June 09, 2003 2:33 PM -0700 "L. Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But this also misses the point -- mandatory filtering is *bad*. Ok, granted. I only use my ISP-supplied email account for ISP notifications. All else goes to a mail server under my control. (And I use fetchmai

RE: [SAtalk] I hate Mandatory Mail Filtering!!!! - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin")

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Kenneth Porter > Sounds like a fetchmail bug. What do the fetchmail folk say? --- The fetchmail documentation says that it _tries_ to get the sender (or resender) of the mail and reconstruct t

Re: [SAtalk] using SA w/ Rav (antivirus)

Chris Barnes wrote on Mon, 9 Jun 2003 13:14:17 -0500: > 1) How well does SA work on machines that are also running an antivirus > program (one that checks incoming & outgoing email)? There shouldn't be any influence. > 3) (more for the developers) > Has there been any thought about merging SA wi

Re: [SAtalk] MTAs and whitelists - an API exists

Justin Mason wrote on Mon, 09 Jun 2003 11:17:42 -0700: > Our all_spam_to, etc. black/whitelisting code will check the following > headers, since about SpamAssassin v2.40: > > X-Envelope-From: for the MAIL FROM: SMTP command > X-Envelope-To: for the RCPT TO: SMTP command > However, at least th

Re: [SAtalk] How to adjust ruleset point value using spamd

At 02:04 PM 6/9/2003 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I have been doing some reading and have not found the best way yet to adjust the point vaule for the SA tests when using spamd. I tried adjusting the ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs file but from what I have read this can not be used unless yo

Re: [SAtalk] using SA w/ Rav (antivirus)

We use RAV and SA with sendmail on our main ISP mail server. SA is run from MIMEDefang - which will can call RAV for you, as well. I found when invoking RAV from MIMEDefang I was getting temp fail errors, so at the moment RAV (sendmail milter version) gets called from sendmail first, followed by M

Re: [SAtalk] Cool regexp GUI

Thanks, I've been looking for something like that on and off for a long time. Justin Mason wrote: for UNIX and windows. very cool: http://weitz.de/regex-coach/ --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The be

Re: [SAtalk] allow_user_rules

allow_user_rules is only needed if you want to have a completely custom rule (ie: body, header, rawbody, uri, or meta) statement in a user_prefs file. It does not need to be enabled to use score statements. And even with it disabled, you can have custom rules in your local.cf, just not in user_

[SAtalk] Cool regexp GUI

for UNIX and windows. very cool: http://weitz.de/regex-coach/ --j. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best thread debugger on the planet. Designed with thread debugging features you've never dreamed of, tr

Re: [SAtalk] Question about sa-learn

i've got a similar thing running SA-exim i only run sitewide - i'm not offering individual users their own prefs (we're a small company) so, spamd is running with /etc/spamassassin/local.cf as the local configuration file in there, i have these lines for bayes: ## ## Bayes ## # Enable the Bay

[SAtalk] allow_user_rules

According to the man page it is not recommended to allow users to create their own rules. Maybe I am understanding this wrong? I am running SA as spamd and I want to increase the score for a test such as " HTML_ALL_CAPS" from 2.9 points to 4 points. How can I do that using spamd or is it not po

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes sometimes not mentioned in headers

Robin Whittle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have not seen any headers so far with BAYES_40, BAYES_44, BAYES_50, or BAYES_56. Is this because they are all score 0.001? In SA 2.54, they're scored at 0, not 0.001. Have you already changed the scores? Assuming they're at 0, then yes, this is the rea

Re: [SAtalk] Gibberish email addresses

Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is testing for gibberish in email address worth attempting? Just a quick note: alot of universities use an automated scheme for the email addresses they give their students. For example, for the longest time my email address was cnb1234 (initials + last 4 of t

[SAtalk] MTAs and whitelists - an API exists

Matt Kettler said: > This is the result of the way SA is invoked and the limited information > it's given when it runs. SA is designed as a standard message filter, so it > never sees the message delivery envelopes, just the headers and bodies. > > Unless your MTA inserts header which tell who

[SAtalk] using SA w/ Rav (antivirus)

We run Rav Antivirus on our mail servers (love it). It has an anti-spam feature, but it's turned off - mostly because it doesn't work very well (perhaps it's an afterthought). 1) How well does SA work on machines that are also running an antivirus program (one that checks incoming & outgoing ema

[SAtalk] SpamAssassin strips out headers added by Communigate (was re: Help Spamassassin for Communigate Pro)

I saw that in my own testing.   Here's the work flow:   - Communigate calls a "spamprep" program that adds the proper envelope-to and from headers to the message file itself and deletes the original   - SpamAssassin scans that temp file with the added headers.   - The Communigate script wi

[SAtalk] Gibberish email addresses

Is testing for gibberish in email address worth attempting? In some basic testing I took just the first part of the email address (the left side of the @) and made a simple scoring system based on the switching of the characters from one type to another (alpha, numeric, other). The first charact

[SAtalk] How to adjust ruleset point value using spamd

Hi, I have been doing some reading and have not found the best way yet to adjust the point vaule for the SA tests when using spamd. I tried adjusting the ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs file but from what I have read this can not be used unless you let all users adjust their preferences. Any help i

Re: [SAtalk] Sugarplum spam poison?

Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I had a quick glance at the website, and wandered onto the page where he discusses why it's difficult for spammers to filter their lists for the addresses generated by sugarplum. That discussion suggests that some portion of the "random" domains in the addr

Re: [SAtalk] I hate Mandatory Mail Filtering!!!! - speakeasy.net bites the dust. (was "I hate SpamAsssassin")

Heya, One possible fix here is to use formail to remove the headers in question (with the -I switch?). I haven't used it, just read up on it during my travels. Greg --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best t

Re: [SAtalk] Upgrade to 2.5?

On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Scott Rothgaber wrote: > Good Morning! > > After hearing about SpamAssassin on the BSDI-Users list I decided to > build a box and check it out. Most impressive! I'm running v2.43 from > the FreeBSD 5.0 ports collection. > > Questions: > > 1) This version seems to be doing th

[SAtalk] help spamassassin for communigatepro

I am having the following problem please help.   A real live spam met the "Any Recipient" parameter with my address being in the list of recipients (and thus passing the [EMAIL PROTECTED] paramer). However there were several other addresses (with domains other than mine) that were in the T

Re: [SAtalk] Can't get it running

JackRnl wrote on Mon, 09 Jun 2003 15:27:09 +0200: > In the 'host map'I added > 110 = pop.hccnet.nl:110 > > and for the 'Incoming Mail (POP3)' In entered 127.0.0.1 > and for 'Incomming Mail | Account Name' In entered 'My.name:pop.hccnet.nl' > This is not correct. You cannot use the hostmap *and*

Re: [SAtalk] Question about BAYES tests

Simon Byrnand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Sadly, like most companies (not just ISP's) - their response was "if >> you pay for a higher level of service, you can turn off SA". > > And if that is the attitude of your ISP (putting SA on sitewide and > wanting you to pay extra for the privelledge of

[SAtalk] Upgrade to 2.5?

Good Morning! After hearing about SpamAssassin on the BSDI-Users list I decided to build a box and check it out. Most impressive! I'm running v2.43 from the FreeBSD 5.0 ports collection. Questions: 1) This version seems to be doing the trick for me. I'm still tweaking some of the values but I'm

[SAtalk] How-I-Did-It: SA and Anomy Sanitizer from Maildrop, with Postfix,Courier IMAP & Red Hat 9.0

Various pages at: http://www.firstpr.com.au/web-mail/ document how I: Integrated Postfix, Courier Maildrop and Courier IMAP - on a Red Hat 9.0 system. Used Courier Maildrop for extensive mail filtering, including calling SpamAssassin and Anomy Sanitizer. The latter is a simple, ex

Re: [SAtalk] Yahoo Groups Best Practice

Hi Darren, On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Darren Shrubsole wrote: > What is the best way to whitelist yahoo groups email lists in SpamAssassin? I am on 11 YahooGroups lists, and here is how I do it: whitelist_to [EMAIL PROTECTED] SA traps stuff from YahooGroups due to the ads they tack onto the end of e

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes sometimes not mentioned in headers

Tom Meunier wrote: > I'd say 98.4% accuracy is pretty darned good, Robin. I agree - this is excellent! With version 1.42 I was getting around 85%. > hold off a little, take the missed spam and send it through sa-learn. I don't think that adding four messages to what the Bayes system has lear

[SAtalk] Can't get it running

Win2K OE6 I just can't get it running. In the 'host map'I added 110 = pop.hccnet.nl:110 and for the 'Incoming Mail (POP3)' In entered 127.0.0.1 and for 'Incomming Mail | Account Name' In entered 'My.name:pop.hccnet.nl' What happens is that it first takes about 10 seconds before a dialog appears

Re: [SAtalk] Question about sa-learn

Michael Satterwhite wrote on Mon, 9 Jun 2003 05:44:16 -0500: > I'm running spamd in root mode. I'd like to start using the Bayesian filter, > but I'm not sure how to train Spamassassin when spamd is running root. I'm > sure I'm missing something very obvious. Can you offer any help? > Not sure,

Re: [SAtalk] Spam with just 1 URL in the body

David du SERRE-TELMON wrote on Mon, 9 Jun 2003 12:04:25 +0200: > All spam I received which isn't detected by spam assassin contain only an > URL in the body. > Your example is quite long ;-) The cryingrussians stuff has even less content since it's not in HTML and doesn't use the random strings.

Re: [SAtalk] socketpair in Perl 5.8 (was: Sugarplum spam poison?)

Simon Byrnand wrote on Mon, 09 Jun 2003 15:25:34 +1200: > (Now about 18MB in 2.55, it was about 12MB in 2.50) > My 2.60-cvs installs are around 22 MB, but as you say, it's not growing over running time. (Well, it starts out a little less and then grows 1 MB or so and then stays.) Kai -- Ka

[SAtalk] Yahoo Groups Best Practice

What is the best way to whitelist yahoo groups email lists in SpamAssassin? Cheers, Darren. BBCi at http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in

[SAtalk] database and delivery for user

We are using qmail-sql, in that one certain user (in our case user "mail", group "qmail") deliveres all mails and the mail accounts are written in the database. I want to run the spamd/spamc. When I try to check PgSQL database for some user spam settings, the user is not found, because I delive

Re: [SAtalk] whitelists

Matt Kettler wrote on Mon, 09 Jun 2003 04:01:05 -0400: > I'm not sure about spamass-milter, but some of the tools which call SA can > be configured to do a true and absolute whitelisting based on the actual > envelope recipient. I'm pretty sure I've read claims by amavisd-new and > procmail set

RE: [SAtalk] Bayes sometimes not mentioned in headers

I'd say 98.4% accuracy is pretty darned good, Robin. Hold off a little, take the missed spam and send it through sa-learn. I don't know where you got the corpus of spam and ham from, but as you send current traffic through sa-learn, rather than a slightly stale corpus, or a corpus from another us

[SAtalk] Invalid Account

Sir or Madam, With the recent change of business names from theVSP.com, Inc. to Virtual Solution Partners, LLC, we have removed all previous email accounts bearing the "thevsp.com" extension. DO NOT WORRY... If you are using an existing email address bearing the "thevsp.com" extension, your me

[SAtalk] Question about sa-learn

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'm running spamd in root mode. I'd like to start using the Bayesian filter, but I'm not sure how to train Spamassassin when spamd is running root. I'm sure I'm missing something very obvious. Can you offer any help? - ---Michael -BEGIN PGP SIGN

Re: [SAtalk] Multiple Local.cf files

Damian Mendoza wrote on Sun, 8 Jun 2003 14:22:56 -0700: > Do I just use another name with the *.cf extension in the same directory? > Yes, *all* the files in there will be used. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com IE-Cente

[SAtalk] Spam with just 1 URL in the body

Hi, All spam I received which isn't detected by spam assassin contain only an URL in the body. Example : html body div align="center" a href="http://pgodir.com/p.pl?j=1367TnRJlBDA549097022HBsyecjr1490.html"; img src="http://pogld.com/images/41/6.gif"; border="0" alt="" /a /div> font size=1 ohpnm

[SAtalk] Spam via NDR bounces

This was mentioned a few days ago here... http://theregister.co.uk/content/55/31084.html --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best thread debugger on the planet. Designed with thread debugging features you've

[SAtalk] Bayes sometimes not mentioned in headers

I have installed SA 2.55 and trained the Bayes system on about 1900 spams and about 1900 good emails. I have RBL checks enabled too. So far, it has been a great success! 259 spams were correctly identified in the first week, and four missed. (This is for one mail account.) Two of the false neg

Re: [SAtalk] whitelists

This is the result of the way SA is invoked and the limited information it's given when it runs. SA is designed as a standard message filter, so it never sees the message delivery envelopes, just the headers and bodies. Unless your MTA inserts header which tell who the actual recipient is, SA h

Re: [SAtalk] qmail+SA

On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 08:25:22AM +0200, Atlas wrote: > Hi, > I had this script instead of regular qmail-queue: > > spamassassin | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue-real > > This worked almost perfectly. > I tried this script qmail-queue: > > spamassassin > /tmp/mail_file.txt > cat /

Re: [SAtalk] qmail+SA

Believe me, it doesn't work! You can't send any file containing message to the qmail-queue. You can send it to the qmail-inject only and it makes a loop - that's bad! :(( Maca -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ --

Re: [SAtalk] Hotmail WebDAV spam

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > The following article explains how Hotmail now provides a WebDAV interface > which makes it easier to automate issuing spam from Hotmail: > http://www.unicom.com/chrome/a/000262.html > I would like to recommend adding a header check for: > Recieved: .*[.]hotmail[.]com

[SAtalk] qmail+SA

Hi, I had this script instead of regular qmail-queue: spamassassin | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue-real This worked almost perfectly. I tried this script qmail-queue: spamassassin > /tmp/mail_file.txt cat /tmp/mail_file.txt | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue-real Why the first case forks a