On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 04:38:40PM -0400, Pete O'Hara wrote:
> Yes, I figured that if for some reason the 50k was too low that I should
> endup with 100k, but I here I have 165k and this is what is confusing me.
> 0.000 0 165010 0 non-token data: ntokens
Just remember, it's
> Here is my procmail rule:
>
> :0B
> * Content-Type: application|Content-Type: audio
> * name=".*.pif"|name=".*.scr"|name=".*.exe"|name=".*.com"
> /tmp/viruses
A similar vein for Postfix users:
In main.cf:
mime_header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/mime_header_checks.regexp
In mime_header_checks
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello John,
Friday, September 19, 2003, 8:59:47 AM, you wrote:
JP> I am a real newbie on this stuff. SpamAssassin is provided on my
JP> virtual server account at viaVerio and it's great. But it misses a
JP> lot of spam related to that V-drug. I wan
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 10:56:19PM -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> No. I'm running sendmail with spamass-milter. I don not want to do it in
> procmail or postfix. I want to do it in SA.
Then you either don't yet understand what SA is for, or you are a troll.
--
On Friday, Sep 19th 2003 at 10:54 -0400, quoth Forrest Aldrich:
=>This new virus appears to generate many (random?) subjects, so it's getting
=>difficult to narrow down.
=>
=>Has anyone filters for Spamassassin that will correctly identify this
=>virus? I'd like to score this one high so they a
Jon Gabrielson wrote:
> Here is my procmail rule:
>
> :0B
> * Content-Type: application|Content-Type: audio
> * name=".*.pif"|name=".*.scr"|name=".*.exe"|name=".*.com"
> /tmp/viruses
Thanks for sharing that. But also a nit. '.' matches any character.
So '.*.' is the same as '.*'. You probably
How do you configure spamassassin installed on this system already?...
Hundreds of fake messages are arriving denying access to other messages.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_
On Saturday, Sep 20th 2003 at 04:44 +0200, quoth Jim Knuth:
=>Hallo Steven W. Orr,
=>
=>> But I don't want to block with a procmail rule. I want to block it with an
=>> SA rule. In fact, I don't even use procmail. I use spamass-milter. I want
=>> all my spam to be rejected before it gets in.
=>
=>
Hi List.
I have noted that my exim mainlog is filling up with errors, such as the one
blow:
2003-09-19 16:09:26 1A0Lsz-Cm-Ie SA: Action: spamd took more than 240
secs to run, accepting message.
What can be causing this.
The server is a P4 based platform with a 3Ghz processor and 1 GB RAM.
Hi,
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Forrest Aldrich wrote:
> This new virus appears to generate many (random?) subjects, so it's getting
> difficult to narrow down.
>
> Has anyone filters for Spamassassin that will correctly identify this
> virus? I'd like to score this one high so they are rejected (via
>
Hello up,
Thursday, September 18, 2003, 7:07:05 PM, you wrote:
u3a> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
>> up <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > This is perl, version 5.005_03 built for i386-freebsd
>> >
>> > Not sure which DB module is installed...perl -V doesn't say...I presume
>> >
Hallo Steven W. Orr,
am Samstag, 20. September 2003, 04:07:16, schriebst Du:
> On Friday, Sep 19th 2003 at 16:09 -0500, quoth Jon Gabrielson:
=>>Just block
=>>
=>>name="*.scr" and name="*.exe"
=>>
=>>you should probably be blocking these anyways.
=>>
=>>Anyone who needs to send an exe can easily
On Friday, Sep 19th 2003 at 16:09 -0500, quoth Jon Gabrielson:
=>Just block
=>
=>name="*.scr" and name="*.exe"
=>
=>you should probably be blocking these anyways.
=>
=>Anyone who needs to send an exe can easily just zip it.
=>
=>Here is my procmail rule:
=>
=>:0B
=>* Content-Type: application|Cont
Just block
name="*.scr" and name="*.exe"
you should probably be blocking these anyways.
Anyone who needs to send an exe can easily just zip it.
Here is my procmail rule:
:0B
* Content-Type: application|Content-Type: audio
* name=".*.pif"|name=".*.scr"|name=".*.exe"|name=".*.com"
/tmp/viruses
Just block
name="*.scr" and name="*.exe"
you should probably be blocking these anyways.
Anyone who needs to send an exe can easily just zip it.
Here is my procmail rule:
:0B
* Content-Type: application|Content-Type: audio
* name=".*.pif"|name=".*.scr"|name=".*.exe"|name=".*.com"
/tmp/viruses
I am a real newbie on this stuff. SpamAssassin is provided on my virtual
server account at viaVerio and it's great. But it misses a lot of spam
related to that V-drug. I want to add a rule that gives a large point value
to
the mention of that certain V-drug or it's chemical name especially in th
Yes, there is an option. You could have a custom script that would send the
message to smtpd on a different port. The master.cf would need a special
configuration for that port to prevent mail loops. Some people use it. I
think SecuritySage has an outline for such a configuration. The
FILTER_R
Hello,
Trying to use SA2.55 and MySQL3.x user prefs with Qmail,
qmail-scanner, vpopmail3.5.27 and squirrelmail 1.4.1.
I have edited the conf.cf file according to the SA documents. Ran spamd in
debug and I cannot get SA to look in or use the SQL database. I have been
hunting on google to n
u3a> On 18 Sep 2003, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
>>
>> Which Perl DB module and perl version are you both using?
u3a> This is perl, version 5.005_03 built for i386-freebsd
I'm using perl 5.6.1/i386-freebsd
-Abigail
---
This sf.net email is s
ust block
name="*.scr" and name="*.exe"
you should probably be blocking these anyways.
Anyone who needs to send an exe can easily just zip it.
Here is my procmail rule:
:0B
* Content-Type: application|Content-Type: audio
* name=".*.pif"|name=".*.scr"|name=".*.exe"|name=".*.com"
/tmp/viruses
quoting from //www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20030918S0012
"The Rating program is available for free to major Internet service
providers and web-based email providers, but, no deals have been reached"
I am not sure if Net56 qualifies as "major", but it seems to be something
that might be added to
I have not seen one specific From/To/Subject pattern to catch a rule on.
The only thing this virus has in common is a '.exe'. Interestingly enough,
it seems that all the really bad worms have attachments that are .bat, .pif,
.scr, .exe, or .com. Most of the fairly tame ones hide in other document
JJensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> line, in addition to the current tests performed on the body only?
1. use bayes, it can use funky spellings like this
2. add a rule:
header LOCAL_VIAGRO Subject =~ /viagro/i
describe LOCAL_VIAGRO whatever description you want
score LOCAL_VIAGRO 1.
Hi all,
**Exuse me for this newbie quetsion , but I did not find anywhere the
answer to
my question**
1-Could anyone explain me why, in Razor installation , when running
razor-admin
create it is useful to change user name from root.
What does it imply if user is still root?
2-Which percentage w
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Chris Barnes wrote:
> piece of /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf:
> # Local Mods
> bayes_ignore_header X-PerlMx-Spam # make Bayes do it on its own
> header LOCAL_PERLMX_TAG_100 /X-PerlMX=~ /\b Probability=100\%/
> score LOCAL_PERLMX_TAG_100 5
> header LOCAL_PERLMX
"Christopher X. Candreva" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Under rc5, spamd gives this warning on start-up:
>
> Use of uninitialized value in scalar assignment at
> /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/Util.pm line 202.
fixed in rc6.
Daniel
-
This new virus appears to generate many (random?) subjects, so it's getting
difficult to narrow down.
Has anyone filters for Spamassassin that will correctly identify this
virus? I'd like to score this one high so they are rejected (via
spamass-milter)... it's been a huge problem all day.
The
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Meunier
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 1:20 PM
> To: Spamassassin List
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Scan Message Max Size
>
>
> >
> > Define "near". The latest Microsoft update spoof is about 155K.
> >
>
> That'd be like that New Shimmer! It's a viru
I use the MIMEDefang and SpamAssassin plugins for sendmail on my FreeBSD
4.8 mail server. For some reason, SpamAssassin tags all messages as
SpamAssassin tags all messages as spam, even when the score is low or
sub-zero. I have required_hits set to 5 in sa-mimedefang.conf, and I have
an X-Spam-Scor
> -Original Message-
> From: Alex van den Bogaerdt
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:42:15AM -0400, Larry Gilson wrote:
> > Hi Alex,
>
> > > in master.cf:
> > >
> > > spamc unix- n n - -
> pipe
> > > flags=Fq
> > > user=spamcheck
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 02:29:21PM -0400, Frank DeChellis is rumored to have said:
>
> I was just fiddling around and I entered a rule to catch some of the text in
> the MS Security Alert patch but it never seems to go over the threshold.
>
> Has anybody come up with a solid rule for this email w
Hi all,
**Exuse me for this newbie quetsion , but I did not find anywhere the
answer to
my question**
1-Could anyone explain me why, in Razor installation , when running
razor-admin
create it is useful to change user name from root.
What does it imply if user is still root?
2-Which percentage
> This new virus appears to generate many (random?) subjects, so it's
> getting
> difficult to narrow down.
>
> Has anyone filters for Spamassassin that will correctly identify this
> virus? I'd like to score this one high so they are rejected (via
> spamass-milter)... it's been a huge problem all
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> up <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > This is perl, version 5.005_03 built for i386-freebsd
> >
> > Not sure which DB module is installed...perl -V doesn't say...I presume
> > there's an easy way to tell?
>
> Not super easy, but not too hard. Sometimes
here's part of my local.cf file -
rawtext MSCUST6a /latest version of security update/i
describe MSCUST6a another MS worm
score MSCUST6a 5
full MSCUST6 /latest version of security update/i
describe MSCUST6 msjunk
score MSCUST6 5
and here's an except of the message that's getting thru with
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?epi-content=GENERIC&newsId=20030918005730&headlineSearchConfigBO=106393320%201063949537000%20%20groupByDate%20%201%20-4%20106393320%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%201000151%20true%20true%20&newsLang=en&beanID=478837757&viewID=news_view
Sor
Yes, there is an option. You could have a custom script that would send the
message to smtpd on a different port. The master.cf would need a special
configuration for that port to prevent mail loops. Some people use it. I
think SecuritySage has an outline for such a configuration. The
FILTER_
Patrick Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Did you enable rules in user prefs in the system sa config? The
> default settings don't allow rules to be defined in user prefs (See
> man Perl::SpamAssassin::Conf).
Hmm, I take it back - it IS reading the /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
file (becau
Under rc5, spamd gives this warning on start-up:
Use of uninitialized value in scalar assignment at
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/Util.pm line 202.
However, it seems to be working fine.
==
Chris Candreva -- [EMAIL
Same here, on FreeBSD-4.9-Prerelease.
Gives an error, but seems to work alright.
At 10:21 AM 9/19/2003, Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
Under rc5, spamd gives this warning on start-up:
Use of uninitialized value in scalar assignment at
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/U
"Eyvonne Sharp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I haven't been able to find any information in the docs on what messages
> are auto_learned and why. Users that have received over thousands of
> emails and have had hundreds of messages classified as spam will only
> have a bayes_msgcount of 94. Doe
Largely "stolen" from one I'd read on the 'net somewhere, but this works
well and has blocked tons of virii:
/^(Content-(Type|Disposition):.*|[[:space:]]*(file)?)name=("[^"]*|[^[:space:]]*)\.(exe|s(ys|cr|hm)|pif|bat|lnk|vb[es]|jse?|hta|cmd|vxd)[[:>:]]/
REJECT This message appears to contain an e
SpamAssassin doesn't bounce mail, period. If you want it to bounce mail, please do
so. If you don't, don't. Further documentation in your MTA's man pages.
-tom
> -Original Message-
> From: Regis Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 4:56 PM
> To: [EMAIL
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 05:31:33PM -0400, Bruce Pennypacker wrote:
> The problem I'm finding with the latest worm is that sometimes the MIME
> attachment for the actual worm isn't included in the e-mail. I've
> already set MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE high but I'm still getting a few
> e-mails an hour
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Bruce Pennypacker wrote:
> Jim wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:00:40PM +0500, Ivar Magne Auestad wrote:
> >
> >>You are writing in the FAQ that you don't focus on viruses, but I have a
> >>suggestion. It would be very easy to add attachment type as a qualifyer.
> >>Ve
On Thursday 18 September 2003 14:57 CET Fred wrote:
> Hello,
> I am using ActiveState perl 5.6.1 and SpamAssassin 2.60rc5 on Windows
> 2000. I have managed to get SpamD running with only 2 minor code changes.
That's interesting. Please open a bug at bugzilla.spamassassin.org and
attach your patch
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 10:42:16AM -0400, Pete O'Hara wrote:
> bayes_expiry_max_db_size 5 # this is to force an auto expiry
That's probably going to confuse things a lot.
As the docs say:
bayes_expiry_max_db_size (default: 15)
What should be the maximum size of th
Jim wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:00:40PM +0500, Ivar Magne Auestad wrote:
You are writing in the FAQ that you don't focus on viruses, but I have a
suggestion. It would be very easy to add attachment type as a qualifyer.
Very many viruses are attached as .pif-files or double extention
attac
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Michael W. Cocke wrote:
> here's part of my local.cf file -
>
> rawtext MSCUST6a /latest version of security update/i
> describe MSCUST6a another MS worm
> score MSCUST6a 5
>
> full MSCUST6 /latest version of security update/i
> describe MSCUST6 msjunk
> score MSCUST6 5
>
> an
Forrest Aldrich asks:
> This new virus appears to generate many (random?) subjects, so it's getting
> difficult to narrow down.
>
> Has anyone filters for Spamassassin that will correctly identify this
> virus? I'd like to score this one high so they are rejected (via
> spamass-milter)...
here's part of my local.cf file -
rawtext MSCUST6a /latest version of security update/i
describe MSCUST6a another MS worm
score MSCUST6a 5
full MSCUST6 /latest version of security update/i
describe MSCUST6 msjunk
score MSCUST6 5
and here's an except of the message that's getting thru with
If you are using qmail-scanner, you just have to tell it not to scan mail
for 127.0.0.1. This is set in environment variables, tcp.smtp. You can set
localhost, or a group, or subnet of ips to not get scanned.
127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
:allow,QMAILQUEUE=/usr/sbin/qmail-scanner-queue.pl"
And
Patrick Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Did you enable rules in user prefs in the system sa config? The
> default settings don't allow rules to be defined in user prefs (See
> man Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf).
Actually no, I didn't. And after looking at the docs, I decided against
doing it
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:00:40PM +0500, Ivar Magne Auestad wrote:
> You are writing in the FAQ that you don't focus on viruses, but I have a
> suggestion. It would be very easy to add attachment type as a qualifyer.
> Very many viruses are attached as .pif-files or double extention
> attachmen
How did you set up this maximum? I'd like to set up this too, but I don't know how...
Maca
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Jeff Funk wrote:
>
> So what does the average person set for the threshold of largest message
> scanned by SA. Right now I'm at 32768 bytes. How large is it safe to
> go???
>
> Jeffr
On Wednesday 17 September 2003 05:48 CET Bob Apthorpe wrote:
> > So it classifies my message for example as (dunno this Outlook version)
> >
> > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 tagged_above=2.0 required=5.0
> > tests=BAYES_30, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK, HTML_20_30, HTML_FONT_COLOR_BLUE,
> > IN_REP_TO, MISSING
Settings in individual users' ~/usr/someuser/.spamassassin/user_prefs file
are not being utilized by SA.
Q: If I have in local.cf a setting of:
required_hits5
if in a user's individual user_prefs file they have:
required_hits1
will the fact that the global file contains "5" ove
Please remember not to post in HTML.
"Fred I-IS.COM" wrote:
> ---cut---
> When spamd receives a connection, it spawns a child to handle the
> request. The child will expect to read an email message from the
> network socket, which should then be closed for writing on the other
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 10:42:16AM -0400, Pete O'Hara wrote:
bayes_expiry_max_db_size 5 # this is to force an auto expiry
That's probably going to confuse things a lot.
As the docs say:
bayes_expiry_max_db_size (default: 15)
What shoul
> -Original Message-
> From: Gary Funck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:38 AM
> To: Spamassassin List
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Scan Message Max Size
> > Define "safe" - I stick with the default of 250kb and have
> never had
> > an issue with it. I can't se
I believe that the emails will all claim to be from a microsoft support
address which might be a part of the solution. Other things which might also
bump up the score would be "cumulative patch", "eliminates all known security
vulnerabilities" (insert sarcasm here), and "This update".
Steve
Fo
I'm getting pummeled with a few dozen copies of the latest MS
worm/trojan every hour so I figured I'd try to get SA to flag them, but
unfortunately I'm not having very much luck. I've been trying to add
some custom rules to my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf but they never
seem to match. Here are
I do not want to check outgoing mail for spam
How can I do this is this with SA 2.55
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
___
Spamassassin-tal
As far as I have seen, no one has written any rules as of yet. Currently
They score a 5.9 for me. I have a good collection of the viri, but no time
today to write the rules :(
The headers differ by a lot. Not one solid tag to tie between them all.
> -Original Message-
> From: John Schnei
Hi
I was just fiddling around and I entered a rule to catch some of the text in
the MS Security Alert patch but it never seems to go over the threshold.
Has anybody come up with a solid rule for this email worm?
Is there a way in SPamAssissin to see exactly how an email is weighed?
Frank
-
here's part of my local.cf file -
rawtext MSCUST6a /latest version of security update/i
describe MSCUST6a another MS worm
score MSCUST6a 5
full MSCUST6 /latest version of security update/i
describe MSCUST6 msjunk
score MSCUST6 5
and here's an except of the message that's getting thru with
up <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is perl, version 5.005_03 built for i386-freebsd
>
> Not sure which DB module is installed...perl -V doesn't say...I presume
> there's an easy way to tell?
Not super easy, but not too hard. Sometimes you can tell just by
running:
file ~/.spamassassin/baye
Absolutely.
www.exit0.us/index.php/VirusBounceRules
among other things.
-tom
> -Original Message-
> From: Ivar Magne Auestad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:01 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Question for the FAQ
>
"James Herschel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Trying searching the archives and Google for this, but I can't see a way to
> force a breakdown for ham. The X-Spam-Report works great for spam, but I'd
> like a breakdown for ham so I can see which rules are getting hit and/or
> need to be tweaked.
here's part of my local.cf file -
rawtext MSCUST6a /latest version of security update/i
describe MSCUST6a another MS worm
score MSCUST6a 5
full MSCUST6 /latest version of security update/i
describe MSCUST6 msjunk
score MSCUST6 5
and here's an except of the message that's getting thru with
"Jeff Funk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So what does the average person set for the threshold of largest
> message scanned by SA. Right now I'm at 32768 bytes. How large is it
> safe to go???
By "safe", though, it's a bit unclear what you mean, but this should
help. Here's my spam corpus bro
On Wednesday 17 September 2003 19:15 CET John wrote:
> I was trying to send email to the list from a Beta version
> of Outlook. I get a bounce back for a few reasons.
Please see bug 2344 and it's dependencies, especially 1970.
Cheers,
Malte
Hi,
I an not seeing auto expiry occuring which I believe I have the correct
configuration for. I am running SA-2.60-rc5, DB_File-1.806. In
/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf (yes this file is being read based on
the sa-learn -D output) I have use_bayes 1
bayes_auto_learn 1
bayes_auto_learn_threshol
Pick it up from:
http://SpamAssassin.org/released/Mail-SpamAssassin-2.60-rc6.tar.gz
http://SpamAssassin.org/released/Mail-SpamAssassin-2.60-rc6.tar.bz2
http://SpamAssassin.org/released/Mail-SpamAssassin-2.60-rc6.zip
md5sum:
ffabc6756210a745475b76bc10c4f1b7 Mail-SpamAssassin-2.60-rc6.tar.
--On Thursday, September 18, 2003 4:30 PM -0400 Christopher Tarricone
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is rumoured to have written:
I am going to be setting up a q-mail ?proxy? server in between the
Internet and one of my Exchange servers. I am using qmail and
qmail-scanner to handle viruses and I have other
On 18 Sep 2003, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> up wrote:
>
> >> The last time this happened, the only way I could get sa-learn to start
> >> working again was to remove _journal, _msgcount, _seen and _toks, which
> >> presumably wipes out all existing bayes data. Is there a better way?
>
> Abigail Marsh
| The FORGED_MUA_* rules mainly compare the X-Mailer header with the
| format of the Message-ID header. From the mail header below, it seems
| that Outlook is not generating a Message-ID at all, relying on the
| next step to insert one (this behaviour is permitted by the
| standards). This sugge
Hi Mitch,
Sorry if this sounds like a dumb question, but did you restart spamd after
you added the rule? Also, Chris Santerre turned me on to creating a custom
.cf file in /usr/share/spamassassin. I don't really like putting custom
rules in local.cf. So I created a file 90_custom.cf.
--Larry
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Meunier
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:44 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Scan Message Max Size
>
>
> Define "safe" - I stick with the default of 250kb and have never had
> an issue with it. I can't see receiving a spam anywh
Hi German,
On Monday 15 September 2003 15:07 CET German Staltari wrote:
> Daniel, I've sent my Makefile to Malte, but yes, I'm using perl 5.005,
> sorry, it's and old RedHat box.
Thanks for your help. Daniel already fixed that stupid typo of mine,
2.60-rc5 behaves nicely when upgrading Perl-5.5
This new virus appears to generate many (random?) subjects, so it's getting
difficult to narrow down.
Has anyone filters for Spamassassin that will correctly identify this
virus? I'd like to score this one high so they are rejected (via
spamass-milter)... it's been a huge problem all day.
The
It could be relativly static if each admin makes up their own... The
admin could also write a script to verify the name resolution.
Alternativly perhaps verisign could register a domain name that could be
used for this purpose.
tm.
Gert Lynge wrote:
So presumably, looking up a garbage address
It now has 9369 Signatures Total...
- Original Message Follows -
>http://www.PetitionOnline.com/icanndns/
>
> Currently has about 7700 signatures...
Kevin W. Gagel
Network Administrator
(250) 561-5848 local 448
(250) 562-2131 local 448
-
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:42:15AM -0400, Larry Gilson wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> > in master.cf:
> >
> > spamc unix- n n - - pipe
> > flags=Fq
> > user=spamcheck
> > argv=/usr/bin/spamc -x -e /usr/sbin/sendmail -i -f
> > $sender $reci
I am going to be setting up a q-mail ³proxy² server in between the Internet
and one of my Exchange servers. I am using qmail and qmail-scanner to handle
viruses and I have other mail server that simply use q-mail, courier, SA and
QSS. There is a specific need for Exchange so I am stuck with it. I w
You are writing in the FAQ that you don't focus on viruses, but I have a
suggestion. It would be very easy to add attachment type as a qualifyer.
Very many viruses are attached as .pif-files or double extention
attachments (document.doc.exe) or refered to as inline mime code. This
would remove
I have an interesting one: Is it possible to not bounce mail that is marked
as spam? Unfortunately, I believe spamassassin is usually called by procmail
and thus would not be possible. Maybe as a milter? But I have read bad things
about the milters. Thanks for any helpful replies.
--
87 matches
Mail list logo
