On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 09:00:42PM -0700, Paul Gregoire wrote:
> I cannot find anything on Google or the SA FAQ / Bugzilla about this "feature", what
> am i doing wrong and how do i turn this off??
it has nothing to do with SA. fix your MTA.
BTW: it's not just your outgoing mails. any mails go
"Ben Holt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My site-wide SA install with Qmail on RH8 broke after applying the
> recently released perl updates. Has anyone else had a similar experience?
>
> The only way I could get SA back working (and email coming in) was to
> revert to an older perl.
Nope.
h
On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 22:56, Rob Chanter wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 09:30:27AM -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> [snip]
> You can block mail at (basically) four points during mail reception:
>
> * During the HELO/EHLO
> * During or after you receive envelope information
> * At the *end* of data
Fred -
I just upgraded to 2.60 and things seem to be a little better now, also
increased the size of an email that SA will reconize helped a lil' to.
-Original Message-
From: Fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 11:51 PM
To: Abigail Marshall; Stephen Reese
Sub
At 08:26 PM 9/23/03 -0500, Chris Tatro wrote:
Which has better integration (meaning easier to setup works well with)
spamassassin?
I've never tried amavisd, but I use MailScanner regularly.
The only "drawback" of MailScanner is it's double-queue mechanism. This is
nice, because your same old MTA
I just setup 2.60 yesterday, Im running RH9 +
Postfix 2.x and thats it.
The problem is that i receive a copy of every email
i originate, the original mail reaches the destination but i still get this
copy???
I cannot find anything on Google or the SA FAQ /
Bugzilla about this "feature", what
At 05:33 PM 9/23/03 +0200, Jim Knuth wrote:
its wrong. Not working in V 2.55.
But
auto_learn_threshold_nonspam
auto_learn_threshold_spam
works fine. Why??
I'm sorry, I was quoting the 2.60 manpage, since no version was specified
and it's what I had handy.
The man Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf for 2.55
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 09:30:27AM -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
>
> Ok. Maybe there's another explanation. See, SA can be used by lots of
> different people. Trolls included. Not everyone uses SA by piping it
> through procmail. I know; the better people do it that way, but I prefer
> to reject
This could also be 2.55 issue where messages with multiple MIME parts was
not completly scanned?
For example, the thread about pic.gif where that spammer used some trick
with multiple mime parts
and that caused the message to be invisible. The good news is this is fixed
in 2.60 and that's a final
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 05:45:13PM -0300, Renato G. Troitino wrote:
> Just curious... when a message get enought points to be a spam, it should be
> set autolearn=yes right? So why all the messages gets autolearn=no even
> getting 15 hits???
I wish people would rtfm:
Also note that a
Hello Stephen,
Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 3:09:51 PM, you wrote:
SR> h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
SR> though see's everything else?
Because the 150K attachment that comes with Swen is either
too big to be sent to SA (depending on how you have
configured
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Daniel Kaliel wrote:
> 1) How do you configure spamassassin working with postfix to limit to size
> of the emails that spamassassin attempts to process?
I use postfix, and procmail as the delivery agent. I have a system-wide
recipe file for procmail, /etc/procmailrc, that fi
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 03:58:04PM -0500, Yackley, Matt wrote:
> Do you have an example of what you are trying to search for that would
> require searching the email as a whole instead of a line at a time?
Here's an example of the kind of double bounces I want to match:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 06:49:52PM -0700, Dan Quinlan wrote:
> should also print out an install-time warning and stuff all of the major
> documentation files into /usr/share/doc/spamassassin if it doesn't
> already. I'm not optimistic, though.
The ones that are installed now in the RPM btw:
Chan
Just curious... when a message get enought points to be a spam, it should be
set autolearn=yes right? So why all the messages gets autolearn=no even
getting 15 hits???
Sds;
Troitino
> Interesting point. Perhaps instead of "autolearn=", it should read:
>
> autolearnt=ham/spam/no
> or
>
"Eric McDonald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> required_hits 7.0
> skip_rbl_checks 1
> use_bayes 0
That should disable it.
local.cf might be not getting read or could be overridden by another
file or user_prefs. Is required_hits showing up as 7.0 in SA-filtered
emails? (Assuming 7.0 isn't speci
Ben Goodwin wrote:
>> OK, I see the reference to the patch, but the RPMS don't include it :-\
Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> They do in the tarball. But it's not a doc or a tool, or part of the
> actual code ...
It's in the INSTALL, the README, the announcement, and the Razor2.
Simon Byrnand wrote:
I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
don't.
The reason SpamAssassin doesn't catch them is twofold:
Maybe I'm misinterpreting the original question, but was it no
Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The ones that are installed now in the RPM btw:
>
> Changes INSTALL README README.spamd sample-nonspam.txt sample-spam.txt
I'd also include:
BUGS
COPYRIGHT
License
TRADEMARK
USAGE
Razor2.patch
> yeah, now that I've changed it. the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Simon,
Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 4:37:27 PM, you wrote:
SB> Although I havn't tried it, I would say that teaching the message to
BAYES
SB> using sa-learn in 2.60 should be very effective, as BAYES_99 in 2.60
has a
SB> high enough score to ta
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 02:40:49AM +0100, Daniel Bird wrote:
> Maybe I'm misinterpreting the original question, but was it not the fact
> that it appeared SA was not even scanning the mail?
could be, I was just reading the subject which implies "why does SA not
mark these mails as spam?"
--
Ran
Which has better integration (meaning easier to setup works well with)
spamassassin?
I have already set up a system up with amavisd-new and spamassassin to scan
email for spam but i am unsure if i like it the amavisd portion of it that
is. I seem to be having problems with it. I was wondering if
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:37:27AM +1200, Simon Byrnand elucidated:
>
> Although I havn't tried it, I would say that teaching the message to BAYES
> using sa-learn in 2.60 should be very effective, as BAYES_99 in 2.60 has a
> high enough score to tag as spam without any other tests...
>
That an
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Bill Landry wrote:
> Well this makes it official, monkeys.com has regrettably thrown in the
> towel.
>
> Bill
That was a pretty classy note from the monkeys.com guy. It would have
been pretty easy for him to be really bitter.
I must admit I have some mixed emotions about
That was it, my maildroprc courier file that invokes SA is the
following:
if ( $SIZE < 204800 )
{
exception {
xfilter "/usr/bin/spamassassin"
}
}
if (/^X-Spam-Flag: *YES/)
{
exception {
to "$HOME/Maildir/.Trash/"
}
}
Well this is the
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 05:07:56PM -0700, Mark R. Cervarich wrote:
> Return-Path to be from a domain that I whitelist. I thought
> SpamAssassin was smart enough to not be fooled by that? Without that
>
> -Start Exerpt from ~/.spamassassin/user-prefs -
> whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED
--On Tuesday, September 23, 2003 3:07 PM -0500 Bob Apthorpe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First Osirusoft, now monkeys.com. Which DNSBL is next? When do the
> crosshairs move to SpamAssassin?
Why are these systems not available through lots of secondaries, with a long
expire time, so a DDoS can't
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 08:02:11PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter elucidated:
>
> That error usually is because the db couldn't be locked. Do you have
> a rogue bayes.lock file in the .spamassassin directory?
>
Not that I can see:
auto-whitelist
bayes_journal
bayes_msgcount
bayes_seen
bayes_toks
user
I received a piece of spam, that had a very large minus score (-79.6)
When I checked to see why, I saw that the user faked the From and
Return-Path to be from a domain that I whitelist. I thought
SpamAssassin was smart enough to not be fooled by that? Without that
100pt adjustment, the spam
Well this makes it official, monkeys.com has regrettably thrown in the
towel.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 4:40 PM
Subject: BLOCK,MISC: MONKEYS.COM: Now retired from spam fighting
> It
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:29:38 -0700, you wrote:
>How easy were amavisd-new and clamav to set up?
clam and f-prot were easy. I had to fiddle a bit with the automatic
updates, but that's because I'm a born fiddler. Amavisd-new was a
little challenging ( If you don't know perl, it will be a lot
cha
Hi,
SpamAssassin 2.55
amavisd-new 20030616p5
postfix 1.1.11.0
(They are all from Debian testing.)
Approximately 1/4th of spams are getting through. No big deal; I
sent them through sa-learn. Well, 1/4th of the spams are *still*
getting through (i.e. not quarantined, with a notification me
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 04:21:13PM -0700, Dale Harris elucidated:
>
> Hey just upgraded to SA 2.6, now when I do a sa-learn I get:
>
> Cannot open bayes databases /home/rodmur/.spamassassin/bayes_* R/W: tie
> failed: File exists
>
> So I'm guessing this is some incompatibility with db format,
Hello Stephan,
Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 12:17:18 PM, you wrote:
SvH> with 'subject_tag *SPAM* (_HITS_)' in local.cf
SvH> i get the score in the subject
SvH> now with this spam result
SvH> X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=5.8 required=5.0 tests=CLICK_BELOW,EXCUSE_10,
SvH>
Stephen Reese wrote:
> h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
> though see's everything else?
In a nutshell, because virus messages don't look much like spam.
Virus messages are usually sent via a legitimate ISP's mail server.
They have (usually) valid return addresse
> I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
> also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
> don't.
The reason SpamAssassin doesn't catch them is twofold:
1) It's a virus, not spam.
2) It's only just come out, after the ruleset for 2.60 wa
My site-wide SA install with Qmail on RH8 broke after applying the
recently released perl updates. Has anyone else had a similar experience?
The only way I could get SA back working (and email coming in) was to
revert to an older perl.
- Ben
--
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 04:21:13PM -0700, Dale Harris wrote:
> Cannot open bayes databases /home/rodmur/.spamassassin/bayes_* R/W: tie
> failed: File exists
>
> So I'm guessing this is some incompatibility with db format, and I'm
> probably going to have to nuke my dbs and start again, right?
T
Is there a size limit that SA implements to avoid scanning huge messages
whose content is primarily binary? I know amavisd has a limit such as
that, but I'm not sure if spamassassin has one as well or not.
Ryan Moore
--
Perigee.net Corporation
704-849-8355 (sales)
704-849-8017 (tech)
www
I got completely frustrated chasing the stupid worm of the week thru
what had essentially become a series of fast hacks, and I decided to
rework my mail system from scratch.
Sendmail out, postfix in
mimedefang out, amavisd-new in
spamassassin, f-prot, and clam stayed the same.
Unless the makeup
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 06:09:51PM -0400, Stephen Reese wrote:
> h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
> though see's everything else?
Worms are not spam by definition. (the "people" sending the worms when
you get it don't intend to send it to you, therefore it's not
Hey just upgraded to SA 2.6, now when I do a sa-learn I get:
Cannot open bayes databases /home/rodmur/.spamassassin/bayes_* R/W: tie
failed: File exists
So I'm guessing this is some incompatibility with db format, and I'm
probably going to have to nuke my dbs and start again, right?
--
Dale
Jonathan Nichols wrote:
>> Great.. is this going to affect SpamAssassin like it did when osirusoft
>> went offline?
Bob Apthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, not unless Ron does something crazy like blacklisting 0.0.0.0/0. I
> expect he'd give people fair warning first if he was going to d
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 03:36:59PM -0600, Daniel Kaliel wrote:
> 1) How do you configure spamassassin working with postfix to limit to size
> of the emails that spamassassin attempts to process?
How are you calling spamassassin? Are you using spamc/spamd? If so,
look at the spamc man page, espec
"Eric McDonald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm having a problem with spamd creating lockfiles in the home directory
> of my filtering agent. I get these errors after starting spamd:
>
> Cannot open bayes databases /var/spool/filter/.spamassassin/bayes_* R/W:
> lock failed: File exists
> [repe
Hi guys:
I was asked to provide a few more details on my configuration, so here
it is:
I was using the default local.cf file with the latest release version of
SpamAssassin (2.60). It's called from postfix (2.0.16) on Solaris 2.6
and is used in conjunction with Anomy, which I just realized is ac
h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
though see's everything else?
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Kaliel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 5:59 PM
To: Stephen Reese; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the
Ryan Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Doh, I remember looking in the perldoc and thinking "ok it isn't in the
> deprecated section", obviously I was wrong since it actually is. Is
> there another config option that would perform the same behavior or has
> that functionality been lost in 2.60
Robert Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi, have any improvements been made to sort out spammers who are
> forging failure notices?
Yes, in 2.60.
Daniel
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://th
Doh, I remember looking in the perldoc and thinking "ok it isn't in the
deprecated section", obviously I was wrong since it actually is. Is
there another config option that would perform the same behavior or has
that functionality been lost in 2.60?
Ryan Moore
--
Perigee.net Corporation
Yes, everything appears to be fine. Any other ideas?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# spamassassin -D --lint
debug: Score set 0 chosen.
debug: running in taint mode? no
debug: ignore: using a test message to lint rules
debug: using "/usr/share/spamassassin" for default rules dir
debug: using "/etc/mail/s
Ryan Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> By default SA will check the 9 previous hosts listed in the RECEIVED
> headers. You could lower that by using "num_check_received" directive in
> your usr_prefs/local.cf, I currently use a setting of four.
"num_check_received" is a deprecated setting in
It may have something to do with the following line:
already learnt correctly, not learning twice
Frederic Tarasevicius
Internet Information Services, Inc.
landy wrote:
> i have 36 emails in a folder called spam
>
> i run sa-lear for that directory and it learns only from a few msgs
>
> here is
You guys are forgetting that dnsbl.sorbs.net has also been taken down
after a DDoS. One too many...
Chris
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_
more puzzled i empty the directory and it tells me it examine 6 msgs
n ebug: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: already
learnt correctly, not learning twice
debug: Learning Spam
debug: uri tests: Done uriRE
debug: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: already
learnt correctly, not learning twice
Learned from 0 message(s) (6 message
1) How do you
configure spamassassin working with postfix to limit to size of the emails that
spamassassin attempts to process?
2) The partners in
my firm have decided they want all Spam deleted not the subject renamed.
How is this done? I can not find the appropriate variable to set in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Start spamd with the "--socketpath /path/to/spamd.sock" option and
> then call spamc with the "-U /path/to/spamd.sock" option. Test,
> adjust, repeat...
Can I just:
touch /var/tmp/spamd.sock
chmod 777 /var/tmp/spamd.sock
Or is there another way
I am getting nailed with these as well, 72 for the day so far. Other admins
I talked here have had over 100 so far on the day.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Stephen Reese
Sent: September 23, 2003 3:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SAta
i have 36 emails in a folder called spam
i run sa-lear for that directory and it learns only from a few msgs
here is output of D
can someone shed advice
as to why it ignores most of the emails there which are already tag as
spam
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> ./learn
debug: Score set 0 chosen.
debug:
I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
don't.
I am running sa 2.6, redhat 7.3, courier 0.43.0
The following is a header from one of the messages:
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Return-Path
Our company has prbly received about 400 in the past 2 days. Yeah, kind of
high, but no different from your others like Code Red.
It should hopefully be all over soon. I think the nimrods who still don't
have anti-virus software on their PC's should be hung by there ankles.
People who have it run
Stephan van Hienen wrote:
> with 'subject_tag *SPAM* (_HITS_)' in local.cf
> now with this spam result
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=5.8 required=5.0
[snip]
> i get this subject: '*SPAM* (05.84)'
> why the 0.04 extra ?
Rounding errors. Note that the X-Spam-Status line on
-Original Message-
From: Samuli Kärkkäinen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 1:35 PM
To: Fred
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Header/body tests docs
AFAICT the "full" test tests one line at a time against the regexp, while
I'd like a test that tests
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Nichols [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 4:13 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] monkeys.dom UPL being DDOSed to death (fwd)
>
>
> Great.. is this going to affect SpamAssassin like it did when
> osirusoft
>
Hi,
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Jonathan Nichols wrote:
> Great.. is this going to affect SpamAssassin like it did when osirusoft
> went offline?
No, not unless Ron does something crazy like blacklisting 0.0.0.0/0. I
expect he'd give people fair warning first if he was going to do that. I
also expect i
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 09:17:18PM +0200, Stephan van Hienen wrote:
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=5.8 required=5.0 tests=CLICK_BELOW,EXCUSE_10,
> i get this subject: '*SPAM* (05.84)'
> why the 0.04 extra ?
uh... 5.84 rounds to 5.8 if you only want 1 decimal place (like in
that header).
> X-
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 02:16:28PM -0500, Chris Cook wrote:
> Question... for some reason, even if I explicitly enable autolearn in
> the config file it always shows autolearn=no in the headers of a scanned
> email, is there something I'm missing?
no means it wasn't, not that it won't. Run with -
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 03:48:15PM -0400, Ben Goodwin wrote:
> OK, I see the reference to the patch, but the RPMS don't include it :-\
They do in the tarball. But it's not a doc or a tool, or part of the
actual code ...
> The README says until at least 2.36 implying 2.36 fixes it, but the patch
Thanks! Solved my question!
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 02:16:28PM -0500, Chris Cook wrote:
> > Question... for some reason, even if I explicitly enable autolearn in
> > the config file it always shows autolearn=no in the headers of a scanned
> > email, is there somethin
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 12:20:27PM -0700, Jason Williams wrote:
> I was curious if anyone had an experiences with Spampd?
> Im currently trying to decide on whether to use spampd or spamd on our mail
> gateway.
Yes, it's very good. But they do different things.
> I was curious if anyone had a p
Hi,
Just seen on SPAM-L:
Apparently Ron's proxy honeynet hit a nerve in the hardcore spammer
community.
First Osirusoft, now monkeys.com. Which DNSBL is next? When do the
crosshairs move to SpamAssassin?
And when will the lawyers and Feds visit the asleep-at-the-wheel
instituions and ISPs hosti
Great.. is this going to affect SpamAssassin like it did when osirusoft
went offline?
[Mimedefang] monkeys.dom UPL being DDOSed to death
Jon R. Kibler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tue Sep 23 14:15:01 2003
Greetings to all:
I have some really sad news. I just got off the telephone with Ron
Guilmette who ru
I apologize for not seeing the razor2 patch earlier.
The README file is not very clear on 2.36 being affected.
--
Benjamin Story
Dot Foods, Inc.
From: Ben Story Sent: Tuesday,
September 23, 2003 10:27 AMTo:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: 2.60, Razor and SQL
Prefs
Hi
all,
My current
At Tue Sep 23 06:52:40 2003, Patrick Morris wrote:
> Robert Nicholson wrote:
>
> > X-Spam-Status:
> > Yes, hits=10.7 required=0.6 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_03_06,
> > DATE_SPAMWARE_Y2K,FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTML,HTML_60_70,
> > HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_FONTCOLOR_GREEN,HTML_FONTCOLOR_RED,
> >
At Tue Sep 23 18:36:16 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> Trying to install SA 2.60, everyting builds and installs fine, but when I
> try to start spamd, in complains about bytes.pm not being installed. it
One possible cause of this problem is if your working directory is the
one that SpamAss
I typically read the README's online which I assumed to be the same as the
distribution.. I didn't see a special upgrade section in those, but I do in
my local copy.
OK, I see the reference to the patch, but the RPMS don't include it :-\
The README says until at least 2.36 implying 2.36 fixes it, b
AFAICT the "full" test tests one line at a time against the regexp, while
I'd like a test that tests the entire message against the regexp.
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:31:45AM -0400, Fred wrote:
> I think this would be
>
> fullTEST_NAME/regex/
>
> Samuli Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > The manual
>
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Chris Tatro wrote:
> Can anyone please help me on this?
I presume you've run "spamassassin -D --lint" ?
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_
Hallo Erik Slooff,
am Dienstag, 23. September 2003, 20:18:08, schriebst Du:
>> > You need to pass the logfile name of your mail-daemon, e.g.
>> > ./spamstats0.4b5.pl /var/log/mail
>> > I use spamd, and it works.
>>
>> > Markus
>>
>> you have an link for this script? Thank you.
>>
> First hit a
I think the main thrust of his answer was that Google Is Your Friend.
http://www.gryzor.com/tools/
-tom
> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Knuth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > First hit after googling for spamstats and perl:
> > http://freshmeat.net/projects/spamstats/?topic_id=245
>
> tha
By default SA will check the 9 previous hosts listed in the RECEIVED
headers. You could lower that by using "num_check_received" directive in
your usr_prefs/local.cf, I currently use a setting of four.
Ryan Moore
--
Perigee.net Corporation
704-849-8355 (sales)
704-849-8017 (tech)
www.per
Er...not quite on topic, but I need a sanity check bad...real bad.
I try to keep my system clean. I run a firewall, spybot, and a good/updated
virus scanner...and hey! SA on my linux server...although I don't get much
if any spam on this account. My ISP account is another matter entirely.
I also
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 09:32:15PM +0200, Jim Knuth wrote:
> Hallo Erik Slooff,
>
> am Dienstag, 23. September 2003, 20:18:08, schriebst Du:
>
> >> > You need to pass the logfile name of your mail-daemon, e.g.
> >> > ./spamstats0.4b5.pl /var/log/mail
> >> > I use spamd, and it works.
> >>
> >> >
with 'subject_tag *SPAM* (_HITS_)' in local.cf
i get the score in the subject
now with this spam result
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=5.8 required=5.0 tests=CLICK_BELOW,EXCUSE_10,
HTML_30_40,HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_04,HTML_LINK_CLICK_HERE,HTML_MESSAGE,
HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TA
Hello everyone.
I was curious if anyone had an experiences with Spampd?
Im currently trying to decide on whether to use spampd or spamd on our mail
gateway.
Our gateway is running postfix, and I wanted all incoming mail received on
the gateway to be sent through SpamAssassin and tagged accordin
At Tue Sep 23 13:55:28 2003, Robert Nicholson wrote:
>
> Forgive me but do the # of hits actually have to be more than
> required_hits?
>
> I was under the impression that if I set required_hits to 6 then
> whenever hits was greater than or equal to required_hits then that mail
> would be cons
Question... for some reason, even if I explicitly enable autolearn in
the config file it always shows autolearn=no in the headers of a scanned
email, is there something I'm missing?
Running SpamAssassin version 2.6 on FreeBSD with sendmail and
spamass-milter, I've checked to make sure the the rul
Can anyone please help me on this?
"CHRISTOP TATRO" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Using
> redhat 9.0
> amavisd-new-20030616
> Postfix version 1.1.12
> spamassassin 2.55
>
> I am having a strang problem with what appears to be that
> my locall.cf file
> is not being
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:38:48 +0100 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Brian Morrison"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Will try again with the latest Razor patch in the 2.60 release version
> of SA.
Razor now patched correctly with contents of 2.60 Razor2.patch file, SA
now returning Razor results again.
Phew! T
> > You can change this in EvalTests.pm, line 2413.
>
> For a lot of people it'd probably be easier to edit local.cf to insert:
>
> rawbody MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE /^TV[qp]QAA[MI]EAA[A8]A/
>
for me local.cf did not work
i'll try evaltests.pm
-
FWIW, my little rant was all over nothing. I just installed 5.8 from FBSD
ports and then everything worked fine, including SA. Interestingly, it
looks like SA looks for 5.8 first when launching, because I kept 5.005
under /usr/bin, and put 5.8 under /usr/local/bin (I did not run the
"use.perl po
Hi There:
I'm having a problem with spamd creating lockfiles in the home directory
of my filtering agent. I get these errors after starting spamd:
Cannot open bayes databases /var/spool/filter/.spamassassin/bayes_* R/W:
lock failed: File exists
Cannot open bayes databases /var/spool/filter/.spam
begin quote
Spam detection software, running on the system "pepino.despiertapr.com", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or block
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
root for det
>
> Is downloading the tarball and installing it myself fundamentally
> different than just doing the install from CPAN?
>
> thanks,
> mark
read the install file it will tell you how
>
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome
I have just installed v2.55. I have been getting non stop message like
the one attached. I have tried to creat a rule but cannot seem to stop
this from coming in. I just recently added score MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE
10.10 to my 50_score.cf file and still no luck.
Any suggestions would be great.
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:35:27AM -0700, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> Not sure what you might do to fix this, but "rpmbuild -ta" with the bz2 file
> fails because the spec file is looking for the gz file. I suppose the makefile
> that generates the tarballs could include one of two generated spec files
> > You need to pass the logfile name of your mail-daemon, e.g.
> > ./spamstats0.4b5.pl /var/log/mail
> > I use spamd, and it works.
>
> > Markus
>
> you have an link for this script? Thank you.
>
First hit after googling for spamstats and perl:
http://freshmeat.net/projects/spamstats/?topic_id=
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 01:36:16PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> To make a long story short, even though 2.53 didn't mind this, none of the
> later versions will start without this. Is upgrading to 5.80 a Good Idea
> (TM)? I'm afraid it will break all kinds of other things that depend on
> 5.
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I thought I'd join the CPAN bandwagon and install SA with it. To my
> horror, it installed perl 5.8 (I use 5.005) and all the mods.
This was a bug in the CPAN modules themselves, prior to CPAN v1.63 or so
(I forget exactly). Following the recommend
hello
i've looked around on the docs and through the files themselves and connot find
the directive that tells spamd where to log its information. it's currently
logging in my /var/log/maillog file which i assume is by default. i'd like to
change it to combine with my exim setup using the /var/lo
1 - 100 of 177 matches
Mail list logo
