Forrier: What is this all about "Zone rejected due to abuse.
What the h*** abuse are you talking about???
The email world is full of "madness" with block overkill at the moment.
At 02:46 PM 8.30.2003 -0500, Mail Delivery Subsystem wrote:
>The original message was received at Sat, 30 Aug 200
Hello,
I've running spamassassin for a long time now but I changed my mail system
to a virtual email / userid mapping system. All mail for email adresses are
stored on disk by a single userid (vhost). Virtual mail delivery is done by
sendmail and procmail. Inside procmail the $LOGNAME matches the
At 01:57 PM 8/30/03 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Until it died of hardware failure, I had a P150 with qmail, spamc/spamd,
and a lightly loaded Apache handling about 6K messages/day. CPU load was
always in the .2-.3 range, except after an ISP outage where load was at
50 to 60 for over an hour.
We
- Original Message -
From: "Jon Fraley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 2:15 PM
Subject: [SAtalk] hardware recomendations
> I am planning on putting a Red Hat 9.0 box on our network to scan
> incoming email using sendmail, spamass-milter and spam
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Forrest Aldrich wrote:
> OT question: I've recently been seeing these types of entries in my
> mail log (sendmail 8.12.9+SA-2.55+SA-Milter) which I can't explain.
The latest SourceForge user newsletter says:
... Now every email that is sent through our
mail servers, eithe
TopPost: I'm having the same problem with the same program combo was
about to as the list as well... just pops up once in a while
At 01:07 PM 8.30.2003 -0400, Forrest Aldrich wrote:
>OT question: I've recently been seeing these types of entries in my mail
>log (sendmail 8.12.9+SA-2.55+SA
Greetings,
Im new to the SA system and have a question about
sa-learn. I have implemented SA at a site wide level and would like to set
up 2 global mail folders, one for missed spam and one for misclassified spam, so
users can move said messages to these folders. Then I'd run a cron job a
Has anyone seen this trick yet?
Viewing Piulhix2k7f9z72orn from Work?
Got any ideas for rules for that one?
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
OT question: I've recently been seeing these types of entries in my mail
log (sendmail 8.12.9+SA-2.55+SA-Milter) which I can't explain. It would
seem that spamd is getting something confused when analyzing inbound
messages from the spamassassin-talk list -- this isn't happening in any
other
Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 05:31 PM 8/30/03 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>
> >why?
>
> Can you name a single nonspam mail sender who doesn't have a Date:
> header in the message when he delivers it to the MTA?
A friend of mine is using some sort of MUA on her Mac systems that
d
Hi,
On 29 Aug 2003 19:15:15 +0100 Yorkshire Dave
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-08-30 at 04:57, Dragoncrest wrote:
> > >Quite. They got pummelled to death by a DDoS. See:
> >
> > Yeah, stupid pathetic cowardly spammers (I can think of some much
> > more colorful choice words
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 04:45:33PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 03:15 PM 8/29/2003 -0400, Jon Fraley wrote:
> > It
> >will probably handle 3k to 5k messages daily. Does anyone have a
> >recommendations on hardware. I have an old Pentium 166 that I thought
> >about using.
>
> A p-166 strikes m
At 05:31 PM 8/30/03 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
why?
Can you name a single nonspam mail sender who doesn't have a Date: header
in the message when he delivers it to the MTA?
No message-id is somewhat common for mass mailings (spam or nonspam) but
I've never seen a nonspam that was also missing a
At 12:31 PM 8/30/03 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
I'm talking of a specific message, the one you use for "spamassassin -D
--lint" when I specify no message to process. I don't know how it looks like,
so I don't know if it should score as ham or spam. But there apparently must
be a message you use for
Your problem is that when you execute spamc from exim, you are telling it
to use a home directory of /tmp. This isn't likely the same home directory
you have when you execute spamassassin manually.
The bayes db is probably being yanked from /tmp/.spamassassin as a result,
since ~/ is now /tmp/.
Looks like this schem is now being used by different spammers, not just the porn
industry.
I am using 2.55
Shalom Ya'll
Amnon Nissan
Deltaforce
919-852-2121
http://www.deltaforce.net
Host, Computers 2K3
on 850 The Buzz (AM 850) in Raleigh NC
Sundays 8-10am
http://www.850thebuzz.com/compute.ht
Carlo Wood wrote on Sat, 30 Aug 2003 13:44:07 +0200:
> I think there should be a test on the latter header entry
> that adds extra points.
>
why?
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
IE-Center: http://ie5.de & http://msie.w
I see a lot of spam in which the first token on the subject line is
something like "ken," or "shiva,", and I've never seen ham that does that.
Are there any rules in 2.60 to catch that pattern, in which a token from
the recipient address shows up as a greeting in the subject line?
-
On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 01:45:05PM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> > Question: Will the Basesian filters be correctly
> > adjusted, despite the change of headers?
I figured it out. The answer is yes.
It only looks at the Message-Id.
--
Carlo Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
On 2.55, I've had a bit more spam get through lately, nothing serious but
a trend. It looks like there has been some creativity on the part of
spammers for the "remove" line. The spams usually have scores in the 4 to
5 range.
I'm thinking of raising the BAYES_90 score. Its seems a pretty good
mar
A spam sneeked through.
It contained this in the header:
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 04:20:56 +0300 (IDT)
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by mxout2.netvision.net.il
I think there should be a test on the latter header entry
that adds extra points.
--
Carlo Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Can someone please answer this mail that I posted a few days ago?
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 01:00:45AM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> I have the following setup:
>
> 1) Firewall receives mail, pipes it through
>spamd and adds a header marking it as
>spam.
> 2) Firewall sends the mail through to
Hi SA-devs and user,
I guess I figured out why Bayes do not work here on my system
(Debian Unstable) with Exim 3-36 and SA 2.55. If I feed spamasssassin
directly from the shell of my user account it uses Bayes but not in the
chain fetchmail->exim->SA->exim->/var/spool/mail. Where ist he problem?
Matt Kettler wrote on Sat, 30 Aug 2003 00:11:35 -0400:
> Well, a "ideal" bayes database training will always give you 0 for ham, and
> 100 for spam.
>
I'm talking of a specific message, the one you use for "spamassassin -D
--lint" when I specify no message to process. I don't know how it looks
Hello SpamAssassins!
I've recently installed SpamAssassin on my small server and must say I'm
pretty much amazed so far! It works really well! Because of some
hardware limitations I still use some DNSBL to keep SA's CPU usage down,
but the combination works really well.
During the installation I
On Saturday 30 August 2003 06:05 CET Chris Barnes wrote:
> I've got 2.60 installed from the cvs, but a version prior to rc1. I've
> held off ungrading for now for 2 reasons:
>
> 1) the version I have seems to be working just fine
> 2) the rc versions seem to have some bugs (to be expected - that's
Robin Witkop-Staub wrote:
> I have instances where users try to email me a block of messages they
> want blacklisted. The spam filter will see them all and tag the
> message as SPAM. Is there a way I can tell spamassassin not to mark
> internal mail as spam or make a filter giving internal users +
At 12:11 AM 8/30/2003 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
I noted that I get quite different scores for spamassassin -D --lint on
different machines depending on Bayes. On one system I get BAYES_10 (a
well trained system with lots of mail in the db), on another system I get
BAYES_70 (with only a few hundred
I've got 2.60 installed from the cvs, but a version prior to rc1. I've
held off ungrading for now for 2 reasons:
1) the version I have seems to be working just fine
2) the rc versions seem to have some bugs (to be expected - that's why
they are "rc").
My question is, when the final release comes
Hello All!
I have a Linux Server Online and as a courtesy service to my friends and
relatives I would like to offer spam filtering with SA.
I wasn't able to find any hints in the docs or archives about setting a SA
Server up without local mailboxes (i.e. as a proxy).
Instead of polling the mailb
if you are running on an ISP which throttles your memory/CPU usage,
sometimes SA will get killed...the complete lack of SA headers in your mail
suggests this might be the case...here is a snippet from my .procmailrc
which runs SA a second time if it didn't fire or got killed the first, very
very ra
Greetings,
I'd like to increase the score for certain bayes
confidence levels. My understanding is that I
need to put one (or more) of these lines from
/usr/locals/hare/spamassassin/23_bayes.cf:
body BAYES_60 eval:check_bayes('0.60', '0.70')
body BAYES_70 ev
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Simon Byrnand wrote:
> Generally the situation for us anyway is that we have fast DNS available
> but individual blacklists may stop replying as osirusoft did... its not
> common for the response time of all lists to be slow at once, so it looks
> like the above scheme may wor
Mark C wrote:
Hi,
I have spamassassin installed on my
debian woody e-mail server, out of the box it works generally ok, except
for a few false alerts, which is why this mail comes in, I wish to allow
each use to setup their own user_prefs file, I have sucsessfully
implimented this, but I'm having
Is there a way to change this behavior?
It seems to me that a high bayes score also shows that it is spam
and it might be possible to grab a few new tokens from the spam
which you otherwise wouldn't get.
Jon.
On Friday 29 August 2003 12:22 pm, Tom Meunier wrote:
> Somebody already answered the s
I want to blacklist debian-user, cause I get it in digest form, only I
accidently sucscribed to the non-digest form and for some bloody reason
can't get it to stop coming. Only I don't want the blacklisting to affect
my bayesian knowledge base. Is there a way to do that, or do blacklists
and whi
On 08/29/03 09:21 PM, Larry Gilson sat at the `puter and typed:
> Hey Louis,
>
> Please forgive this reply. Your messages keep getting wrapped in a
> text file as it comes through with an unknown content-type:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit
Sorry about that. Thanks for givi
Hey Louis,
Please forgive this reply. Your messages keep getting wrapped in a text
file as it comes through with an unknown content-type:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit
I did read the message even though it is not included here.
So if I understand correctly, what you really wan
Carlo Wood writes:
>This message ID gets *severely* punished...
>perhaps a bit TOO much.
>
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>MSGID_SPAMSIGN_ZEROES (4.3 points) Message-Id generated by spam tool (zeroes variant)
>MSGID_OE_SPAM_4ZERO (4.3 points) Message-Id generated by spam tool (4-zeroes varia
Gak. I didn't realize y'all had changed things to **NOT** read
/etc/mail/spamaassin/*
for config files.
When I symlink /usr/local/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf to
/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
it works as advertised.
PLEASE revert whatever change was made to NOT read /etc/mail/spamassassin
On Saturday 30 August 2003 00:31 CET Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Malte S. Stretz wrote on Fri, 29 Aug 2003 23:42:15 +0200:
> > What does perl -V:prefix say?
>
> /usr
>
> So, this is dependant on the perl PREFIX path? That explains why others
> get a different path although they don't use a specific PREFI
On Saturday 30 August 2003 00:16 CET Simon Byrnand wrote:
> > I don't like that behaviour, too, and will see what I can do about it
> > Malte
>
> All I was attempting to do with the \n's was to change the X-Spam-Status
> header to look like 2.55's - where there is a (folded) newline between
> "requ
On Saturday 30 August 2003 01:19 CET Lucas Albers wrote:
> I'm curious to know what sort of performance increase you should see
> because of this.
Using an network protocol (TCP) for communications on one machine generates
quite some overhead. UNIX sockets don't have this overhead and are thus
b
Carlo Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This message ID gets *severely* punished...
> perhaps a bit TOO much.
>
> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> MSGID_SPAMSIGN_ZEROES (4.3 points) Message-Id generated by spam tool (zeroes
> variant)
> MSGID_OE_SPAM_4ZERO (4.3 points) Message-Id generate
Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 29 August 2003 at 18:37:38 -0400
> At 03:13 PM 8/29/2003 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>
> >I notice that there are different scores for tests depending on "how"
> >spamassassin is running, and that one of the differences is whether
> >Bayes filter
Hi Martin,
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Radford
> At Fri Aug 29 20:36:31 2003, Larry Gilson wrote:
> >
> > Hi Carlo and Martin,
> >
> > I was wondering I could ask a huge favor of you both. Could you
> > search your spam and ham history to see if there is a good
> > correlatio
46 matches
Mail list logo
