Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

At 8/15/03 08:59 PM , Chuck Mize wrote: How exactly is a host that knowingly and willingly provides services to a spammer innocent? It seems to me that vitriol should be directed towards those providers that rake in the spammer money each month and use their "innocent bystander" clients as shie

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

John Rudd wrote: On Thursday, Aug 14, 2003, at 23:01 US/Pacific, Alan Hodgson wrote: you should use SPEWS if you choose to block ISP's who are spam supporters Which should be read as: You should use SPEWS if you want to participate in the bullying of "the little guy". SPEWS sucks. If there's

Re:[OT] [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

On Aug 15, 2003 at 21:18, Rick Macdougall wrote: >Actually changing ISP's is a lot easier than getting a new citizenship >in a new country. While I would never use SPEWS to block email, I am Assuming I have a choice of ISPs in my area, and assuming you'll pay the setup cost. -- Satya. http://s

Re: [SAtalk] [SA talk] Little OT: getting my outgoing mail blocked for no reverse dns

Steve Thomas wrote: > Indii wrote: > > My email server is a debian box while my dns server is an MS 2000 server. > > Which would i need to setup the reverse dns on and how would i go about > > doing this? This is not something upon which the OS matters. It is out of your control, unless they del

Re:[OT] [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

John Rudd wrote: And you pay taxes to a country that is participating in international organizations whose agenda ends up degrading foreign cultures and bombing foreign houses. Even if you're against it, you're supporting it. So, does that make it ok for agents of those foreign groups to b

Re: [SAtalk] Scores

At 12:17 PM 8/15/03 -0700, Stephen Boals wrote: Just upgraded to 2.55, and in testing found that I am getting different scores between versions. Has the scoring changed for rules? Can I get some background on why, and thought process? Thanks. New scores were generated in 2.50, and they were

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

--On Friday, August 15, 2003 7:03 AM -0700 John Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You should use SPEWS if you want to participate in the bullying of "the little guy". SPEWS sucks. If there's a such thing as "non-violent terrorism*", SPEWS is its poster child. (* and I'm not one who jumps on that c

Re: [SAtalk] Update (2.60)

Matt Kettler writes: > At 01:27 PM 8/15/03 -0700, Justin Mason wrote: > >hmm, must have missed this. Why would we need to extend the deadline? ;) > >All mass-check data should be in by now. > > I said I wasn't sure if they had or not.. I didn't see any posts on SaDev > that would indicate that

Re: [SAtalk] [RD] new rules for listwashing tokens, ROT-13 etc.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Justin Mason) writes: > We (Dan and I) were thinking that picking up the envelope-to and/or To: > addresses, and permuting those, would probably work pretty well to do > that. I had a rule I was testing for this, but it's been lingering since 2.60 froze. I finished cleaning it

Re: [SAtalk] Update (2.60)

At 01:27 PM 8/15/03 -0700, Justin Mason wrote: hmm, must have missed this. Why would we need to extend the deadline? ;) All mass-check data should be in by now. I said I wasn't sure if they had or not.. I didn't see any posts on SaDev that would indicate that all the mass-check data was in, but I

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

On Thursday, Aug 14, 2003, at 23:01 US/Pacific, Alan Hodgson wrote: you should use SPEWS if you choose to block ISP's who are spam supporters Which should be read as: You should use SPEWS if you want to participate in the bullying of "the little guy". SPEWS sucks. If there's a such thing as

Re: [SAdev] Re: [SAtalk] [RD] new rules for listwashing tokens,ROT-13 etc.

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 20:03, Justin Mason wrote: > Henry Stern writes: > > > Yorkshire Dave writes: > > > > My original intention was to write an eval to run through the range of > > > > caesar ciphers and import a list of substitution cipher codes, but it's > > > > too slow (probably because I wri

Re: [SAtalk] [RD] new rules for listwashing tokens, ROT-13 etc.

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 18:19, Justin Mason wrote: > Yorkshire Dave writes: > > My original intention was to write an eval to run through the range of > > caesar ciphers and import a list of substitution cipher codes, but it's > > too slow (probably because I write very poor perl), so here's the nex

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

On Friday, Aug 15, 2003, at 00:44 US/Pacific, Yorkshire Dave wrote: I totally disagree with the innocent victim bit. Sure they're innocent until they find out, but as soon as they become aware they're on a spamhaven ISP their next payment makes them a willing spam supporter not an innocent victi

Re: [SAtalk] FORGED_MUA_OIMO: Why me?

At Fri Aug 15 22:36:30 2003, Simon Byrnand wrote: > Exactly what version of Outlook or Outlook Express are you using ? > > As far as I can see the FORGED_MUA_OIMO rule is significantly broken and > falsely detects recent versions of Outlook/Outlook Express as being > "forged". I reported this to

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 15:16, John Rudd wrote: > On Friday, Aug 15, 2003, at 00:44 US/Pacific, Yorkshire Dave wrote: > > I totally disagree with the innocent victim bit. Sure they're innocent > > until they find out, but as soon as they become aware they're on a > > spamhaven ISP their next payment

Re: [SAtalk] spamassassin user wise configuration

At 11:44 AM 8/15/2003 -0700, swapna ghosh wrote: or example, if user A wants that the mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED]" should not reach at his mailbox it should not, but [EMAIL PROTECTED] should reach to user B, as user B has *no objection* for that

Re: [SAtalk] Scores

Scoring changes between versions because -- well, spam does. New rules or added and old rules are retested before every release. Stephen Boals wrote: Just upgraded to 2.55, and in testing found that I am getting different scores between versions. Has the scoring changed for rules? Can I get

Re: [SAtalk] FORGED_MUA_OIMO: Why me?

> > When I send email to myself, it gets tagged with this rule: > > FORGED_MUA_OIMO > > Why is this happening? Is it something I have set (or not set) in > Outlook? > Why does it think my email is forged? > > Ron Hi Ron, Exactly what version of Outlook or Outlook Express are you using ? As far

RE: [SAtalk] FORGED_MUA_OIMO: Why me?

If are using Outlook 2003 of Outlook XP SP2 this is a know bug http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1970 Thanks, Tony B, CCNA, Network+ Systems Administration GO Concepts, Inc. / www.go-concepts.com Are you on the GO yet? What about those you know, are they on the GO? 513.934.2800 1.

[SAtalk] FORGED_MUA_OIMO: Why me?

When I send email to myself, it gets tagged with this rule: FORGED_MUA_OIMO Why is this happening? Is it something I have set (or not set) in Outlook? Why does it think my email is forged? Ron --- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-

Re: [SAtalk] this one slipped through and really ticked me off . ..

--On Friday, August 15, 2003 8:08 AM -0400 Louis LeBlanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have also reported them through SA (using the -r flag) and I want to do one more thing - forward each message to the government uce address, but I can't remember the exact address (is it [EMAIL PROTECTED]) If s

RE: [SAdev] Re: [SAtalk] [RD] new rules for listwashing tokens, ROT-13 etc.

> Yorkshire Dave writes: > > My original intention was to write an eval to run through the range of > > caesar ciphers and import a list of substitution cipher codes, but it's > > too slow (probably because I write very poor perl), so here's the next > > best thing. > > > > I've thrown together a l

RE: [SAdev] Re: [SAtalk] [RD] new rules for listwashing tokens, ROT-13 etc.

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: August 15, 2003 4:04 PM > To: Henry Stern > Cc: 'Justin Mason'; 'Yorkshire Dave'; 'spamassassin list'; 'devel list' > Subject: Re: [SAdev] Re: [SAtalk] [RD] new rules for listwashing tokens, > ROT-13 etc. > >

Re: [SAtalk] Update (2.60)

Jim Knuth writes: > Hi Matt, > > > they extended the deadline or not, but either way they'll need to do a GA > > run on that data and then look at the overall results and test for a bit > > before releasing. > > > > thank you. Can you inform me (the list), > if something new happens? hmm, must

[SAtalk] spamassassin user wise configuration

Hi      Very recently I have configured spamassassin 2.55 in my cobalt raq4r server... I have configured it user wise with spamc/spamd.. So the user whoever wanted to filter their mail, i have given them option to configure their ~user/.spamassassin/user_prefs file      The installatio

RE: [SAtalk] Brian Platt/Hgsi is out of the office.

Oh boy, I thought this kind of problem was reserved for the luser/MCSE lists... Chris -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 2:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [SAtalk] Brian Platt/Hgsi is out o

[SAtalk] Scores

Just upgraded to 2.55, and in testing found that I am getting different scores between versions.  Has the scoring changed for rules?  Can I get some background on why, and thought process?  Thanks.

Re: [SAtalk] Update (2.60)

Hi Matt, > they extended the deadline or not, but either way they'll need to do a GA > run on that data and then look at the overall results and test for a bit > before releasing. > thank you. Can you inform me (the list), if something new happens? cu Jim ---

Re: [SAdev] Re: [SAtalk] [RD] new rules for listwashing tokens, ROT-13 etc.

Henry Stern writes: > > Yorkshire Dave writes: > > > My original intention was to write an eval to run through the range of > > > caesar ciphers and import a list of substitution cipher codes, but it's > > > too slow (probably because I write very poor perl), so here's the next > > > best thing. >

Re: [SAtalk] Update

Hi Rich, > 3) Add the following line to /etc/apt/apt.conf: > APT::Default-Release "stable"; > > and the following to /etc/apt/sources.list: > deb http://debian.2z.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free > ?? Not found!? Err http://debian.2z.net unstable/main Packages 404 Not Found Ign htt

Re: [SAtalk] this one slipped through and really ticked me off . . .

On 08/15/03 07:57 AM, Kai MacTane sat at the `puter and typed: > At 8/15/03 05:08 AM , Louis LeBlanc wrote: > > I have a quick question. I received three copies of a spam > > message last night that all slipped through SA. Normally, I > > wouldn't give too much thought, but this one really pissed

Re: [SAtalk] [RD] new rules for listwashing tokens, ROT-13 etc.

Yorkshire Dave writes: > My original intention was to write an eval to run through the range of > caesar ciphers and import a list of substitution cipher codes, but it's > too slow (probably because I write very poor perl), so here's the next > best thing. > > I've thrown together a little CGI w

[SAtalk] Brian Platt/Hgsi is out of the office.

I will be out of the office starting 08/15/2003 and will not return until 08/25/2003. I am attending a training class. I will respond to your message when I return. If you need anything that is of an urgent nature, please contact Leslie Branch x 2826 or Carl Carpenter at x 2343. --

[SAtalk] Re: Help understanding spamc and bayes

Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If the bayes database doesn't have 200 ham messages in it's learning > database, the use of the bayes engine will be completely disabled > until it has. > > Now, SA does have autolearning, but in general it rarely auto-learns > a ham message. So it will tak

Re: [SAtalk] Update

Jim Knuth wrote: Hello, how can I update (upgrade) under Debian (3.0 Woody) of SA 2.55 on SA 2.60? cu Jim Thank you for help Jim, I can think of several options, each with advantages/disadvantages: 1) Upgrade your entire system to unstable (probably not what you want to do if it's a product

Re: [SAtalk] this one slipped through and really ticked me off . . .

On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 08:08:51AM -0400, Louis LeBlanc is rumored to have said: > > do one more thing - forward each message to the government uce > address, but I can't remember the exact address (is it [EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED] This just got me wondering about something... I wonder

Re: [SAtalk] archives for seeding bayes?

In a way, yes. We have no users on our SA gateway as they are all in SQL. Now Spamassassin runs as a unix user (amavis in our case, since we are using amavisd), so when I initially filled the bayes DB I did it for the amavis user. You can also put a bayes_path directive in your local.cf so that

[SAtalk] Re: archives for seeding bayes?

Patrick Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Trying to seed the Bayes databases with other people's spam probably > isn't a good idea -- the whole idea is that it learns what *your* ham > and spam look like. Filling it up with mail from other sources is > probably just going to lead to innacurate r

Re: [SAtalk] archives for seeding bayes?

Hi, The spam corpus I used is actually a set of messages caught by SA; I don't know how many unique messages there are (maybe 80%?), but there's more than 12,000 total. So it won't help SA much, but I'm guessing that it helps to seed bayes. The tgz file is 27M in size. I can make it available vi

Re: [SAtalk] Update (2.60)

At 04:46 PM 8/15/03 +0200, you wrote: how can I update (upgrade) under Debian (3.0 Woody) of SA 2.55 on SA 2.60? Well, SA 2.60 isn't released yet.. it's a development version right now. However, if you want to play with it, there are snapshot tarballs available on the spamassassin.org website. Ju

Re: [SAtalk] archives for seeding bayes?

Unfortunately, as far as I know if you use SQL prefs, you're stuck with site-wide Bayes. I don't think individual user Bayes databases are possible when SA runs under a single account. A single site-wide database works, though. Ricardo Kleemann wrote: I know SA can handle user prefs via SQL,

Re: [SAtalk] archives for seeding bayes?

Thanks. I'm not using SQL prefs, but did wonder if it was possible to use SQL with bayes, having the user directories specified in SQL so the bayes databases could be identified. I'm currently using a site-wide bayes, but as you said, it'll be getting seeded with different users' spam. - O

Re: [SAtalk] archives for seeding bayes?

Thanks. I know SA can handle user prefs via SQL, but can it also handle bayes learning from users in SQL? What I mean is, my email users are in SQL, they are not regular unix users, which means that there's no unix user uniquely mapped for spamc to run as. So I'm stuck with using a generic user,

[SAtalk] archives for seeding bayes?

Hi, I've trained my bayes database with about 12,000 spam and 7,000 ham messages, but I was wondering if there are much larger archives available for seeding bayes? Thanks Ricardo --- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET site

Re: [SAtalk] archives for seeding bayes?

Trying to seed the Bayes databases with other people's spam probably isn't a good idea -- the whole idea is that it learns what *your* ham and spam look like. Filling it up with mail from other sources is probably just going to lead to innacurate results. Ricardo Kleemann wrote: I've trained

[SAtalk] Odd messages filling my tmp dir

SA has been a dream. Recently, though, my tmp dir has been filling up with entries that look like: -rw---1 qmaild nofiles 0 Aug 12 05:28 fixhezxkac8 -rw---1 qmaild nofiles 0 Aug 7 21:50 sa.10032.0UlVBR These are all empty files, but there are many of them. I c

Re: [SAtalk] archives for seeding bayes?

At 07:57 AM 8/15/03 -0700, you wrote: I've trained my bayes database with about 12,000 spam and 7,000 ham messages, but I was wondering if there are much larger archives available for seeding bayes? That's a pretty large seed, you shouldn't need more. As for larger archives, really you want the ar

Re: [SAtalk] this one slipped through and really ticked me off . . .

At 8/15/03 05:08 AM , Louis LeBlanc wrote: I have a quick question. I received three copies of a spam message last night that all slipped through SA. Normally, I wouldn't give too much thought, but this one really pissed me off. Notice the little remark about not reporting them or I'd get spamme

Re: [SAtalk] Problems with upgrade 2.43 -> 2.55

Never mind. I found the problem. The path to share/spamassassin was set wrong by make in spamd.Doh! Thanks anyway, Lois At 8:14 AM -0400 8/15/03, Lois Bennett wrote: Thanks, I will put together some training ham and spam. I have a further question though. I suspect that there is somethi

[SAtalk] Update

Hello, how can I update (upgrade) under Debian (3.0 Woody) of SA 2.55 on SA 2.60? cu Jim Thank you for help --- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are availab

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

- Original Message - From: "Simon Byrnand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Thomas Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 3:24 AM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer > > - Original Message - > > From: "Alan Hodgson" <[EMAIL

RE: [SAtalk] [RD] new rules for listwashing tokens, ROT-13 etc.

I've used this CGI and it works incredibly great! I want to give a big public "Thank You" to Dave for all the work he has been doing. Since starting the Rule Emporium, I have been in contact with many people who are doing wonderful things for the SA community. Gives me a nice warm and fuzzy feeli

[SAtalk] this one slipped through and really ticked me off . . .

I have a quick question. I received three copies of a spam message last night that all slipped through SA. Normally, I wouldn't give too much thought, but this one really pissed me off. Notice the little remark about not reporting them or I'd get spammed again and again? So naturally, I reporte

Re: [SAtalk] Problems with upgrade 2.43 -> 2.55

Thanks, I will put together some training ham and spam. I have a further question though. I suspect that there is something wrong with my installation because I used to get reports that listed lots of filters in the X-Spam message but now I get either tests=AWL or tests=none. How do I go ab

Re: [SAtalk] Problems with upgrade 2.43 -> 2.55

Thanks, I will put together some training ham and spam. I have a further question though. I suspect that there is something wrong with my installation because I used to get reports that listed lots of filters in the X-Spam message but now I get either tests=AWL or tests=none. How do I go ab

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes problems

Daniel J. Andrea II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said in SpamAssassinTalk on 24-Jul-03 20:51:11 --> DJA> Well, I got it trained again and it now shows the bayes tokens DJA> when I run the sample spam through it. However, I am still not DJA> getting the bayes tokens on the emails as they come through. (s

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

> - Original Message - > From: "Alan Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 7:39 PM > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer > > >> On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 07:02:45PM -0500, Thomas Cameron wrote: >> > Good luck. SPEWS compl

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 05:52, Thomas Cameron wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Alan Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 7:39 PM > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer > > > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 07:02:45PM -0

[SAtalk] spamd memory usage ?

Hi! Does anyone have an idea of the memory-usage from spamd ?? I'm running the spamd daemon via daemontools, and have experienced "out of memory" errors in the debuglog when spamc is called from qmail-scanner-queue. The spamd daemon/service has been limited to 40MB so far, but I've raised it t

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 11:52:23PM -0500, Thomas Cameron wrote: > Um, which description was that? I don't see *any* description of SPEWS > other than my *opinion* that it sucks. You actually help make my case - you > are a SPEWS supporter and you call me a liar (and it's "disingenuous") for > no

Re: [SAtalk] Newbie

On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 04:09:00AM +0300, Bryan Jones wrote: > I have been all over the spamassassin.org site and that > seems to not have a lot of information. I have just > installed RedHat 9.0 and I am using that for my mail server. Before you get started, install all updates from RH9.0 errat

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 05:08, Peter Kiem wrote: > Hi, > > >The upshot of this experience proved to me, once and for all, that > > blackhole lists are a *bad* (*BAD*) idea unless you, yourself, happen > > to be administering the list. The whole thing revolves around trust, > > and a single fals

Re: [SAtalk] Help with BAYES database problem

On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 12:34:00PM +0300, Bob Mcgregor wrote: > Cannot open bayes_path /usr/exim/.spamassassin/bayes/bayes R/O: Invalid > argument ... > Does anyone have any ideas how we can continue to use the BAYES > database from our old server, or do we have to start afresh. Make sure the new

Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer

- Original Message - From: "Alan Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 7:39 PM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Moved into the ex-ip of a spammer > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 07:02:45PM -0500, Thomas Cameron wrote: > > Good luck. SPEWS completely sucks -

[SAtalk] [RD] new rules for listwashing tokens, ROT-13 etc.

I've been locating and deciphering listwashing tokens and hidden addresses in spam bodies for a while now, built up quite a collection, and I think it's about time they were put to good use. My original intention was to write an eval to run through the range of caesar ciphers and import a list of

[SAtalk] spamd and SQL-based user prefs [was Newbie]

Bryan said: > I am needing some assistance in configuring the spamassassin so > that I can have all my users email accounts filtered. Ditto that. IMO the documentation is thorough, but a bit fragmented. If anyone knows of a walkthrough that gives a bit of a framing context, I would much appreciate