Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greetings,
i am running Spamd under Linux without any Problems. Thanks for this
great piece of Software.
Because i don't want to/can't install the PHP-Webfrontend, i had the
idea a few days ago to solve this with an mail-based frontend - like
Mailman use this.
My
Sorry if this posted twice..
Must scores be listed in 50_score.cf?
If I was to place the entire rule, description and score in the appropriate
cf file.. will it read the rule and score it if the rule applies??
---
This sf.net email is spons
On Di 02 Sep 2003 06:06:00p Carlo Wood wrote:
> I thought that there should only ONE spamd be running?
Hi,
only if you start spamd with
-m 1
Greetings, Bernd
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://th
On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Larry Gilson wrote:
> > > :0fw
> > > * !^Subject:.*SAtalk
> > > | spamc -u "$LOGNAME"
> > >
> > > SCANNED=$?
> > >
> > > :0 Efw
> > > * SCANNED ?? ^^0^^
> > > | spamassassin -a
> >
> > I'm pretty sure that wouldn't work. The E causes the second
> > to always be skipped unl
On 09/02/03 01:19 PM, Karl Larsen sat at the `puter and typed:
>
>
>
> You both should just go to the FAQ on the SpamAssassin web and
> use what's there. Here is my .procmailrc and it's been working fine:
Thanks for the input, but I think you're missing the whole point of
this part of t
On 09/02/03 07:52 PM, Larry Gilson sat at the `puter and typed:
>
>
> > :0
> > * !^Subject:.*Satalk
> > {
> >:0fw: spamassassin.lock
> >* < 256000
> >| spamc
> >
> >SCANNED=$?
> >
> >:0fw: spamassassin.lock
> >* ! SCANNED ?? ^^0^^
> >* < 256000
> >| spamassassin
> -Original Message-
> From: Louis LeBlanc
> > :0fw
> > * !^Subject:.*SAtalk
> > | spamc -u "$LOGNAME"
> >
> > SCANNED=$?
> >
> > :0 Efw
> > * SCANNED ?? ^^0^^
> > | spamassassin -a
>
> I'm pretty sure that wouldn't work. The E causes the second
> to always be skipped unless the fir
At 03:18 PM 9.2.2003 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>FWIW, Sendmail 8.12.9 (and possibly prior versions) supports a limit:
>
>define(`confMAX_DAEMON_CHILDREN', `24')dnl
>
>
>Tony Nelson
Tony, how does one arrive at the limit '24'.?
Best regards,
Jack L. Stone,
Administrator
Sage American
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 01:47:02PM -0600, Brian Godette wrote:
> Your system is being killed by Linux's OOM killer. The OOM killer in 2.4
> series doesn't appear to be all that bright and I have had it kill init in
> the past which results in what you describe (pings but services down).
>
> You
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 07:26:02PM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
> Folks -- are you using the -m switch to limit how many spamds can run?
> If you don't use that, and you're using an MTA that also does not limit
> concurrent local delivery commands, like sendmail, this will be an issue.
> Try the -m s
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 02:03:36PM -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
>
> I just got spamd and spamc working with procmail in Red Hat 9
> Linux. There are still a few spam messages getting through. I'm saving
> them in a file /home/karl/mail/spam. Is there any way I can help SA do
> better if I pu
Hi Karl,
On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Karl Larsen wrote:
>
> Since I use procmail I have a list of people and lists that I
> want to receive email from, and most but not all lists, do not have
> spam. How can I set up SpamAssassin to pass these good lists without any
> tests?
I subscribe to 13
Your system is being killed by Linux's OOM killer. The OOM killer in 2.4
series doesn't appear to be all that bright and I have had it kill init in
the past which results in what you describe (pings but services down).
You basically have two options, either add more memory or limit the number of
well, that will match that string in the body..
but it should also match not having an attachment to return true.
On Tuesday, September 2, 2003, at 01:39 PM, Chris Santerre wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Vanasco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 1:1
I just got spamd and spamc working with procmail in Red Hat 9
Linux. There are still a few spam messages getting through. I'm saving
them in a file /home/karl/mail/spam. Is there any way I can help SA do
better if I put these messages somewhere else?
--
I don't have any better way than has already been suggested, but it brings
up a good point - is there any to reference the recipient's email address
as part of a rule? I don't think, in general, that the recipient's email
address is passed to SA, but the user name is (in order to do queries to
fi
On 2 Sep 2003, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> Karl Larsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Since I use procmail I have a list of people and lists that I
> > want to receive email from, and most but not all lists, do not have
> > spam. How can I set up SpamAssassin to pass these good lists wit
Karl Larsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 2 September 2003 at 13:57:32 -0600
>
> On 2 Sep 2003, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>
> > Karl Larsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Since I use procmail I have a list of people and lists that I
> > > want to receive email from, and most but n
On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Louis LeBlanc wrote:
> On 09/01/03 04:41 PM, Larry Gilson sat at the `puter and typed:
> > Hi Louis,
> >
> > Please forgive the delay in responding. I was out of touch for a period of
> > time.
>
> Ditto . . .
>
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Louis LeBlanc
>
FWIW, Sendmail 8.12.9 (and possibly prior versions) supports a limit:
define(`confMAX_DAEMON_CHILDREN', `24')dnl
Tony Nelson
Director of IT Operations
Starpoint Solutions
115 Broadway, 2nd Fl.
New York, NY 10006
On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Carlo Wood wrote:
> Here is the output of 'ps auxw' at the moment the
> machine did hang.
>
> What immedeately catches the eye is the large number of
> /usr/bin/perl /usr/bin/spamd -d -u nobody
> processes.
I think you should have a single spamd listed and the many pe
On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 15:51, Ryan Bingham wrote:
> Did anyone ever figure out a fix for this on Exchange 2000? It will be a
> while before I can migrate to 2003.
>
> To recap: the problem involves retrieving intact headers from messages
> moved to Public Folders on Exchange 2000.
>
> Thanks,
>
On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 14:39, cornelius bolten wrote:
> heya folks,
>
> thanx to Jason S. first, for bringing qmail-scanner in my life ;-)
> the test-installation-script works fine. i setup fprot too, both
> (spam. + fprot) working fine.
>
> but now i have a new problem!
> all mail comming fro
Folks -- are you using the -m switch to limit how many spamds can run?
If you don't use that, and you're using an MTA that also does not limit
concurrent local delivery commands, like sendmail, this will be an issue.
Try the -m switch.
--j.
---
Hi folks,
Apologies if this seems obvious to you but I have been trying to get
it to work for a couple of hours without luck.
I am trying to programmatically get at the scores (and later,
descriptions) for the rules configured in my install of
SpamAssassin, including scores modified by user_prefs
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Vanasco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 1:10 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Rule Help Needed
>
>
>
> variant on sobig rules,
>
> I'd like to have a rule for messages without attachments, if
> their bo
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 08:53:50AM -0700, Ron Gilbert wrote:
> >>I read here that bayes is only turned on after
> >>it learned from at least 200 spams AND 200 hams.
> >>That number could be more. It only starts to be
> >>efficient after you got say 1000 of both.
>
> Can someone explain to me why
Hi Robert,
I am not a regex wiz either but I will give you a working example I hope
will help.
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Mikelsons
> Hello,
> I'm SpamAssasin user for some time.
> I still recieve a spam which gets fairly low score (2.5), due
> it is looking like kinda ordinary
> -Original Message-
> From: Ron Gilbert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >>Because without a few hundred messages, it would be
> completely and utterly
> useless?
>
> Yes, i do understand that. I guess my complaint is that I
> would have rather
> it started working and been somewhat us
On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron Gilbert wrote:
> I guess my complaint is that I would have rather it started working and
> been somewhat useless (like POPFile did), or provide much better
> feedback on it's status.
SpamAssassin's ethos has always been that a few false negatives are better
than even one
On 09/01/03 04:41 PM, Larry Gilson sat at the `puter and typed:
> Hi Louis,
>
> Please forgive the delay in responding. I was out of touch for a period of
> time.
Ditto . . .
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Louis LeBlanc
>
> > After rereading a lot of procmail docs, I've found that th
>>Because without a few hundred messages, it would be completely and utterly
useless?
Yes, i do understand that. I guess my complaint is that I would have rather
it started working and been somewhat useless (like POPFile did), or provide
much better feedback on it's status. From what I can tell
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 06:31:35PM +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Don't use auto-learning, really.
Then I'll have to bounce back all other mail
from my working machine to the firewall.
> > So, I moved the filters to my firewall
> which firewall rules do you use to reject spam?
?
I mean: I starte
variant on sobig rules,
I'd like to have a rule for messages without attachments, if their body
contains "See the attached file for details"
The messages are multipart with one text/plain part
this would match sobig messages where the virus has failed to attach
itself
---
>>I read here that bayes is only turned on after
>>it learned from at least 200 spams AND 200 hams.
>>That number could be more. It only starts to be
>>efficient after you got say 1000 of both.
Can someone explain to me why SA won't start using bayes until it's seen
several hundred messages? I
Carlo Wood wrote on Tue, 2 Sep 2003 14:20:07 +0200:
> Anyway, there should be a possibility for me to make sure
> that certain mails are not auto-learned at all - independant of
> their score.
>
Don't use auto-learning, really.
> So, I moved the filters to my firewall
>
which firewall rules do
Jonathan Marc Ludwig wrote on Tue, 2 Sep 2003 11:05:33 -0400 (EDT):
> I was curious if there was a feature to generate a report that instead of
> having one message has the subject and sender of all messages filtered out
> that day. I would rather have a "Spam Summary" option instead of getting
>
Karl Larsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since I use procmail I have a list of people and lists that I
> want to receive email from, and most but not all lists, do not have
> spam. How can I set up SpamAssassin to pass these good lists without any
> tests?
Either whitelist them in Spam
Here is the output of 'ps auxw' at the moment the
machine did hang.
What immedeately catches the eye is the large number of
/usr/bin/perl /usr/bin/spamd -d -u nobody
processes.
I thought that there should only ONE spamd be running?
USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME
Because without a few hundred messages, it would be completely and utterly useless?
It would be like meeting an airline pilot who was 5'7" tall and had a scar on his left
cheek and wore his hat backwards. Bayes would think that scars on left cheeks were as
reliable an indicator of airline-pilo
Since I use procmail I have a list of people and lists that I
want to receive email from, and most but not all lists, do not have
spam. How can I set up SpamAssassin to pass these good lists without any
tests?
--
- Karl Larsen k5di Las Cruces,NM
I was curious if there was a feature to generate a report that instead of
having one message has the subject and sender of all messages filtered out
that day. I would rather have a "Spam Summary" option instead of getting
an email per filtered email. IS this currently possible? Thanks!
On Fri, 2003-08-29 at 23:59, Dragoncrest wrote:
> Have you considered using Procmail to filter the mail once its
> tagged or not tagged? That's what I use and it's awesome. Does everything
> I need. If you need a good working example procmailrc file, let me know
> and I'll pass along
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 04:04:45PM +0200, Kandji Développeur wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've been using spamassassin for 2 weeks and it (*seems*) that it caused my system
> to go down...
>
> The story :
> linux RedHat 7.3 - kernel 2.4.18#3 on smp system (2xPII)
> perl 5.6.1
> spamassassin version 2.
You might be experiencing hardware problems that only occur under load.
SA/spamd uses a lot
of cpu and memory cycles. If it runs long enough, on large messages, it might
push the cpu
past its operating range temperature, if for example, the system cooling is
marginal. Likewise,
marginal memory mig
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 09:06:33AM -0500, Robin Witkop-Staub wrote:
> I am getting the following error in my maillog but cant determine from the
> error where exactly I should be looking for the error:
>
> Sep 1 02:10:44 mail spamd[3420]: Failed to compile body SpamAssassin tests,
> skipping: ^I(
I read here that bayes is only turned on after
it learned from at least 200 spams AND 200 hams.
That number could be more. It only starts to be
efficient after you got say 1000 of both.
Once it kicks in, you should see tests with
names like BAYES_*.
--
Carlo Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
Hello,
I've been using spamassassin for 2 weeks and it (*seems*) that it caused my system to go down...
The story :
linux RedHat 7.3 - kernel 2.4.18#3 on smp system (2xPII)
perl 5.6.1
spamassassin version 2.55
postfix 1.1.12-0.7
1) The system had been running for 90 days.
2) I installed spam
Chris Santerre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 2 September 2003 at 10:01:21 -0400
> From: David Dyer-Bennet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Is anybody working on a rule for lots of garbage words in email? Now,
> > if I were a spammer I'd pick real words out of a dictionary, which is
> > easy eno
I am getting the following error in my maillog but cant determine from the
error where exactly I should be looking for the error:
Sep 1 02:10:44 mail spamd[3420]: Failed to compile body SpamAssassin tests,
skipping: ^I(syntax error at (eval 24) line 298, near "0bscene" syntax error
at (eval 24) l
I have upgraded my SA to 2.55-1. I have the bayes module learning
from a cron entry that looks at a spam mbox that I move my spam
to from evolution. sa-learn output is logged and it is indeed
learning. My question is how can I get warm and fuzzies that it
is actually catching spam based on bayes k
I've bet these sort of msgs. came across your system, but usual body/rawbody rules do
not work!
(Lucky enough, BAYES does the trick...)
Any ideas??? Here is such a thing:
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mx.expurgate.net (mx.expurgate.net [195.190.135.10])
by
check www.exit0.us in the random letters section. Fred's have been working
great.
> -Original Message-
> From: David Dyer-Bennet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, September 01, 2003 1:16 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] garbage
>
>
> I've been seeing more and more
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 01:02:47PM +1200, Simon Byrnand wrote:
> Well don't forget that the auto_learn_spam threshold is 15 in 2.55 and 12
> in 2.60, and its very rare that a spam pasted into the *body* of a message
> will be autolearnt, simply because most high scoring spams get most of
> their
Hello,
I'm SpamAssasin user for some time.
I still recieve a spam which gets fairly low score (2.5), due it is looking
like kinda ordinary mail.
I'm not good at regexps (seeing the syntax alone makes me nuts) so i
couldn't add the rule i wanted.
The rule of my idea is to add a subject and/or body c
Simon Byrnand wrote on Tue, 02 Sep 2003 09:56:54 +1200:
> Likewise if a message scored -5 before whitelisting and -105 total, then it
> WOULD be learnt as ham, because its pre-whitelist score was hammy. Make sense ?
>
I think we discussed this some months ago here, don't remember the outcome, bu
First off, my apologies if I have sent this mail twice.. I'm having some
technical difficulties on my end with mail.
Onto my question:
I currently have the following setup:
Gentoo server running Postfix, relaying to an internal Exchange server.
Amavisd/Clamd is doing the virus scanning, with SA d
At 06:02 2/09/2003 +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 01:02:47PM +1200, Simon Byrnand wrote:
> At 02:24 2/09/2003 +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 09:56:54AM +1200, Simon Byrnand wrote:
> I don't whitelist this mailing list and I know at least one of the
> develop
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 01:02:47PM +1200, Simon Byrnand wrote:
> At 02:24 2/09/2003 +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 09:56:54AM +1200, Simon Byrnand wrote:
> I don't whitelist this mailing list and I know at least one of the
> developers (Justin) doesn't either and I don't have
I have RedHat 9 on my Intel box and would like to install
spamassassin-2.55-1.7.3.i386.rpm, but it requires
perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-2.55-1.7.3.i386.rpm, which requires
perl-HTML-Parser-3.27-1.i686.rpm, which as you can see requires
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/i686-pld-linux/5.6.1
rpm -qpR perl-HTML-Pa
You'll likely find that those words wouldn't be considered "interesting
tokens" - and if they do, they will also be considered interesting
tokens for all the ham you receive discussing these topics. The
bayesian engine doesn't simply grab words; it grabs tokens, and it grabs
them in some really (t
At 02:24 2/09/2003 +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 09:56:54AM +1200, Simon Byrnand wrote:
> On the other hand, there is nothing to stop the message being
autolearnt if
> its score before the whitelisting value is added, so for example if a spam
> would normally score 20 and be aut
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 09:56:54AM +1200, Simon Byrnand wrote:
> On the other hand, there is nothing to stop the message being autolearnt if
> its score before the whitelisting value is added, so for example if a spam
> would normally score 20 and be autolearnt, and you for some reason
> whiteli
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 07:12:10PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
> >cron doesn't exist. It is a fact however that it still works:
>
> No, it's not a fact that it still works.. sa-learn may run without
> crashing, but it's not doing any learning because there's no bayes db to
> update.
>
> >there
If you upgrade to 2.60 you need to set your autolearn ham score to 0,
instead of the default of -2 in 2.55.
By default shouldn't the auto-learn threshold for 2.60 be set to 0?
(not at a shell prompt so can't look right now.)
If not I think it should be, otherwise it won't learn ham.
--Luke
As
> >Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 04:20:56 +0300 (IDT)
> >Date-warning: Date header was inserted by mxout2.netvision.net.il
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler
> 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
> D
At 01:15 AM 9/1/2003 +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> SpamAssassin uses ~/ to determine the home directory of the current user.
> And yes, that is standardized and should be implemented by your OS.
But that makes not much sense in the case of sa-learn.
As is obvious from the "//.spamassassin/user_prefs",
67 matches
Mail list logo
