Re: [SAtalk] SPAM, BLOCK: Death of monkeys.com DNSbl (fwd)

2003-09-24 Thread Justin Mason
David B Funk writes: >On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Daniel Bird wrote: > >> A P2P DNSBL? interesting. I've also thought about this a little since >[snip..] >> DNSBL could learn from that seed other DNSBLS, and replicate the data, >> and then (maybe?) do the RBL lookups locally. >> >> Obviously, the file (z

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes configuration questions

2003-09-24 Thread Justin Mason
David B Funk writes: >On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Abigail Marshall wrote: > >> Here's the issue: >> >> System: Running SA 2.54, FreeBSD Unix, Berkeley DB 1.85 >> (Hash, version 2): >[snip..] >> -Abigail > >Abigail, >Where the heck did you manage to find V1.85 of the Berkeley DB kit? >It's ancient and bug

Re: [SAtalk] SPAM, BLOCK: Death of monkeys.com DNSbl (fwd)

2003-09-24 Thread Bob Apthorpe
Hi, On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:13:19 +0100 Daniel Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Forrest Aldrich wrote: > > > A new approach to DNSBL might be considered, where there is a > > peer-to-peer sharing (authentication, scoring whatever) that mirrors > > content -- something of that nature, whereby t

[SAtalk] new argument for spamc

2003-09-24 Thread Jeremy Kister
In my environment, it would be very useful for spamc to take an argument that would tell it to prepend subject_tag to the subject. The default behavior is to not modify the subject. I realize I could gain this functionality by implementing user_prefs, but the *only* thing i want different on a us

Re: [SAtalk] razor2 setuid issue

2003-09-24 Thread Bob Apthorpe
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:04:35 -0400 "Dan Didier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Running redhat8 with qmail and spamassassin as well as trying to get > razor2 working. > > If I look in my log files, I have entries like this: > > Sep 24 19:04:16 sandbox spamd[14130]: connection from localhos

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes configuration questions

2003-09-24 Thread David B Funk
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Abigail Marshall wrote: > Here's the issue: > > System: Running SA 2.54, FreeBSD Unix, Berkeley DB 1.85 > (Hash, version 2): [snip..] > -Abigail Abigail, Where the heck did you manage to find V1.85 of the Berkeley DB kit? It's ancient and buggy ( I was using it a decade ago w

RE: was Re: [SAtalk] Interesting discovery re: spamassassin/mimed efang/sendail.)

2003-09-24 Thread Larry Gilson
> -Original Message- > From: Ron Johnson > On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 19:26, Larry Gilson wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Ron Johnson > > > I don't believe that any Unix-like variants have ever caught a > > > *virus*(except in a labratory). If you have evidence to the >

Re: [SAtalk] SPAM, BLOCK: Death of monkeys.com DNSbl (fwd)

2003-09-24 Thread David B Funk
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Daniel Bird wrote: > A P2P DNSBL? interesting. I've also thought about this a little since [snip..] > DNSBL could learn from that seed other DNSBLS, and replicate the data, > and then (maybe?) do the RBL lookups locally. > > Obviously, the file (zone) transfers involved would

Re: [SAtalk] RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK problem

2003-09-24 Thread Ryan Moore
If there are recieved-from headers from the recipient's mail system, then they may get checked in the rbl's depending on how deep they are. The recipient can use the 'trusted_networks' option that was added in 2.60 to get around that problem. I don't have the start of the thread on the machine

[SAtalk] Bayes configuration questions

2003-09-24 Thread Abigail Marshall
Here's the issue: System: Running SA 2.54, FreeBSD Unix, Berkeley DB 1.85 (Hash, version 2): Problem: When bayes_toks grows to more than 5K, it becomes corrupted during sa-learn and ultimately trashed or lost. My solution: Set bayes_expiry_max_db_size to lower level to force expiry, so that baye

Re: [SAtalk] Any RBL's down recently for SA 2.55?

2003-09-24 Thread Daniel Quinlan
Rob Mangiafico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Has anyone noticed any of the default RBL's in 2.55 being down lately? > Seeing a lot of 13 second times for processing, and was wondering if > anyone knew of any problems with the default RBL's. Yes. Osirusoft is down. I recommend upgrading to 2.6

Re: [SAtalk] Problem applying Razor2 patch

2003-09-24 Thread Daniel Quinlan
"Dan Didier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I tried applying the patch for the spamassassin setuid issue with razor > and get the following: > > patching file Client/Config.pm > Hunk #1 succeeded at 383 with fuzz 2 (offset 10 lines). > patching file Client/Core.pm > Hunk #1 FAILED at 216. > 1 out

Re: [SAtalk] RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK problem

2003-09-24 Thread Gerry Doris
> At 19:47 24/09/2003 -0400, Gerry Doris wrote: > > >>SA 2.60 is giving a dynablock hit a wopping 2.62 score!!! It isn't >> really >>a problem that your SA is hitting this rule (you can always turn it off). >>The real problem is that everyone else's SA 2.60 is doing the same. If >>they retain the

Re: [SAtalk] RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK problem

2003-09-24 Thread Terry Milnes
But you are missing the point, mail is being identified as RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK when it is the recipient who is in the dial up block, not the sender. The sender is on the rogers network using aloak smtp/pop3 servers, sending a message to a domain that is in the dial up block. The message should N

Re: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?

2003-09-24 Thread Dale Harris
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 05:27:57PM -0400, Stephen Reese elucidated: > how do I turn up the MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE? > check out your .spamassassin/user_prefs file, it has directions in there. But it is basically like: score MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE 6.0 or some such. Dale -

Re: [SAtalk] RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK problem

2003-09-24 Thread Simon Byrnand
At 19:47 24/09/2003 -0400, Gerry Doris wrote: SA 2.60 is giving a dynablock hit a wopping 2.62 score!!! It isn't really a problem that your SA is hitting this rule (you can always turn it off). The real problem is that everyone else's SA 2.60 is doing the same. If they retain the default 7 spam

Re: [SAtalk] RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK problem

2003-09-24 Thread Gerry Doris
> But you are missing the point, mail is being identified as > RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK when it is the recipient who is in the dial up block, > not the sender. > > The sender is on the rogers network using aloak smtp/pop3 servers, > sending a message to a domain that is in the dial up block. > > The messa

RE: was Re: [SAtalk] Interesting discovery re: spamassassin/mimed efang/sendail.)

2003-09-24 Thread Ron Johnson
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 19:26, Larry Gilson wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Ron Johnson > > I don't believe that any Unix-like variants have ever caught a > > *virus*(except in a labratory). If you have evidence to the > > contrary, I'dlove to hear it. > > http://search.symantec.c

[SAtalk] Problem applying Razor2 patch

2003-09-24 Thread Dan Didier
I have razor versions razor-agents-2.36 razor-agents-sdk-2.03 I tried applying the patch for the spamassassin setuid issue with razor and get the following: patching file Client/Config.pm Hunk #1 succeeded at 383 with fuzz 2 (offset 10 lines). patching file Client/Core.pm Hunk #1 FAILED at 216

[SAtalk] 2.6 install problem

2003-09-24 Thread Jack Gostl
During my first test run at an install, I got the following: t/spamd_allow_user_rulesspamd start failed: log: Insecure directory in $ENV{PATH} while running with -T switch at /usr/opt/perl5/lib/5.6.0/Cwd.pm line 85. Not sure what it means. I'm running AIX 5.1. -- Jack Gostl [EMAIL PR

Re: [SAtalk] Scoring on the fly vs. Scoring manually

2003-09-24 Thread Patrick Morris
Since you didn't post the e-mail, what rules got hit (either time), or how you've got SA set up (network tests enabled? DCC? Razor?), it's impossible to say why you got two different scores -- but it's not too uncommon for the same message tested at different times to get different scores, fo

[SAtalk] Scoring on the fly vs. Scoring manually

2003-09-24 Thread John
Quick question. I just upgraded to 2.60 and have been running various versions for close to 6 months. I have an issue where when the mail is delivered to my smtp server and filtered through MimeDefang -> SpamAssassin the score (in this case) was 4.623: Sep 24 12:30:41 odie sendmail[10140]: h8

Re: [SAtalk] SPAM, BLOCK: Death of monkeys.com DNSbl (fwd)

2003-09-24 Thread Kenneth Porter
--On Wednesday, September 24, 2003 11:13 PM +0100 Daniel Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A P2P DNSBL? interesting. I've also thought about this a little since the > death of Monkeys but also have no idea about how this would be implimented, > but certainly the model of something like direct conn

[SAtalk] Is HOST_PATTERN wrong?

2003-09-24 Thread Christian Moeller
Hi all! First of all I want to mention that I am not subscribed to this list. If you want to contact me, please answer directly. I really like SpamAssassin, but while using it there was a minor glitch I stumbled upon. Wanting to whitelist a silly WindowsNT-Machine (you don't want to know details

RE: was Re: [SAtalk] Interesting discovery re: spamassassin/mimed efang/sendail.)

2003-09-24 Thread Larry Gilson
> -Original Message- > From: Ron Johnson > I don't believe that any Unix-like variants have ever caught a > *virus*(except in a labratory). If you have evidence to the > contrary, I'dlove to hear it. http://search.symantec.com/custom/us/query.html http://www.sophos.com/search/index.c

Re: [SAtalk] RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK problem

2003-09-24 Thread Gerry Doris
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Terry Milnes wrote: > This may be a little difficult to explain but here goes. > > All of my systems are behind a nat box. My mail server OS is linux, > using qmail/vpopmail/mysql procmail etc.etc.. > > Upgraded to Spamassassin V 2.60 rc6 (the day before the final release)

[SAtalk] Scoring on the fly vs. Scoring manually

2003-09-24 Thread John
Sorry if this ends up being a double post. Quick question. I just upgraded to 2.60 and have been running various versions for close to 6 months. I have an issue where when the mail is delivered to my smtp server and filtered through MimeDefang -> SpamAssassin the score (in this case) was 4.62

[SAtalk] autolearning too much ?

2003-09-24 Thread Simon Byrnand
Hi Everyone, Maybe I'm not reading this right, but I just saw a message (from this list in fact) which scored as follows: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_HOTMAIL

[SAtalk] Re: Anyone using DCCifd?

2003-09-24 Thread Ed Kasky
At 07:57 PM Wednesday, 9/24/2003, Bernd Kuhls wrote -=> On Mi 24 Sep 2003 06:21:34p Ed Kasky wrote: > >debug: DCCifd is not available: no r/w dccifd socket found. Sep 24 16:03:23 router dccifd[861]: 1.2.7 listening to /etc/apache/mail/dcc/dccifd My netsat: unix 2 [ ACC ] STREAM LIS

Re: was Re: [SAtalk] Interesting discovery re: spamassassin/mimedefang/sendail.)

2003-09-24 Thread Ron Johnson
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 08:26, willie wrote: [big snip] > >On top of that, don't assume that linux can't catch something... It's > >happened before, it will happen again. I don't believe that any Unix-like variants have ever caught a *virus* (except in a labratory). If you have evidence to the con

[SAtalk] razor2 setuid issue

2003-09-24 Thread Dan Didier
Hi, Running redhat8 with qmail and spamassassin as well as trying to get razor2 working. If I look in my log files, I have entries like this: Sep 24 19:04:16 sandbox spamd[14130]: connection from localhost [127.0.0.1] at port 40105 Sep 24 19:04:16 sandbox spamd[15609]: info: setuid to qscand suc

Re: [SAtalk] razor2 check skipped: Bad file descriptor

2003-09-24 Thread Daniel Quinlan
Dan Wilder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm seeing messages in my logfile containing (wrapped for > readability): > > razor2 check skipped: > Bad file descriptor Insecure dependency in connect while > running setuid at /usr/lib/perl/5.6.1/IO/Socket.pm line 108, > line 1438. Read the README

Re: was Re: [SAtalk] Interesting discovery re: spamassassin/mimedefang/sendail.)

2003-09-24 Thread Daniel Bird
willie wrote: I use a MS OS desktop at home (at work I use Solaris and Redhat Linux)and have not put a virus scanner on it in over 3 years, and have not caught a virus yet. How do you KNOW you haven't? ;-) I HAVE received them but I choose not to use security risk software such as: Internet E

Re: [SAtalk] Re: razor2 check skipped: Bad file descriptor

2003-09-24 Thread Dan Wilder
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 07:45:59PM +, Bernd Kuhls wrote: > On Mi 24 Sep 2003 09:00:17p Dan Wilder wrote: > > > razor2 check skipped: > > Hi, > > did you apply the Razor patches contained in SA 2.60? > > Greetings, Bernd No, unless installing SA 2.60 from CPAN somehow applies those. Which

Re: [SAtalk] lots of false positives in 2.60

2003-09-24 Thread landy
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 15:19, Martin Radford wrote: > At Wed Sep 24 08:32:18 2003, Steve Simitzis wrote: i have to say that in over 200 spams i have not seen a false positive --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek hea

Re: [SAtalk] Re: razor2 check skipped: Bad file descriptor

2003-09-24 Thread Dan Wilder
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 10:21:50PM +0200, Marcus Frings wrote: > This is not a help, this is just to confirm that you are not the only > one because on my woody box I exactly get the same error after upgrading > to 2.60. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that I'd just upgraded to 2.60 when I noticed t

Re: [SAtalk] Re: razor2 check skipped: Bad file descriptor

2003-09-24 Thread Dan Wilder
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 07:45:59PM +, Bernd Kuhls wrote: > On Mi 24 Sep 2003 09:00:17p Dan Wilder wrote: > > > razor2 check skipped: > > Hi, > > did you apply the Razor patches contained in SA 2.60? > > Greetings, Bernd Just tried them. Works like a charm. Thanks!! --

Re: [SAtalk] SPAM, BLOCK: Death of monkeys.com DNSbl (fwd)

2003-09-24 Thread Daniel Bird
Forrest Aldrich wrote: A new approach to DNSBL might be considered, where there is a peer-to-peer sharing (authentication, scoring whatever) that mirrors content -- something of that nature, whereby the hackers would basically have to DDos the entire internet to prevent its use. Not sure h

Re: [SAtalk] Timelog in 2.60 or lack thereof

2003-09-24 Thread Klaus Mueller
Ben M. VanWagner wrote: > > Has it been replaced ??? Hi, it's removed in the last release canditate I think. Check the release notes. Klaus --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes upgrade from 2.55 to 2.60?

2003-09-24 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 05:02:16PM -0500, Ron Roskens wrote: > > You should read the release announcement. It's also in the > > build/2.60_change_summary file. > > This file does not exist in the 2.60 tar file retrieved from CPAN. hrm. indeed. have to fix that for 2.61. -- Randomly Generate

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes upgrade from 2.55 to 2.60?

2003-09-24 Thread Ron Roskens
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Theo Van Dinter wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 01:53:36PM -0500, Genchev, Sergei wrote: > > Since there have been "significant changes in BAYES" for 2.60, when I > > upgrade to 2.60 from 2.55: > > > > - will the upgrade keep my old BAYES database (in DB_file format)? > >

[SAtalk] Any RBL's down recently for SA 2.55?

2003-09-24 Thread Rob Mangiafico
Has anyone noticed any of the default RBL's in 2.55 being down lately? Seeing a lot of 13 second times for processing, and was wondering if anyone knew of any problems with the default RBL's. Thanks. Rob --- This sf.net email is sponsored b

[SAtalk] Timelog in 2.60 or lack thereof

2003-09-24 Thread Ben M. VanWagner
I tried to check time timelog to look at performance and check hit rates for dcc, pyzor, razor, etc. Only to find it has disappeared on me since I last used it. It is still in the man page though And the config options page was broken at SA.org debug: Failed to parse line in SpamAssassin confi

Re: [SAtalk] lots of false positives in 2.60

2003-09-24 Thread Martin Radford
At Wed Sep 24 21:36:02 2003, Steve Simitzis wrote: > i would be happy to. i've attached an example to this email. > > you'll note that the message contains ads for toner in the footer > and also gets a few points for the mention of "free membership!", > and that's all well and good. however, no p

[SAtalk] Broken test for hotmail helo?

2003-09-24 Thread Mike Grau
Hello. I've installed SA 2.60 and sent mail from a hotmail account always triggers FAKE_HELO_HOTMAIL From the logs: ipname helo RELAY TEST: 65.54.245.31 [65.54.245.31] hotmail.com RELAY TEST: 65.54.245.124 [65.54.245.124] hotmail.com RELAY TEST: 65.54.245.152

[SAtalk] bayes looking to wrong directory

2003-09-24 Thread Jon Fraley
I am using SA site-wide. I am starting spamd with: /usr/bin/spamd -D -c -a -u stopspam I am getting this output after upgrading to 2.60: debug: using "/tmp/spamd-28791-init/.spamassassin" for user state dir debug: bayes: no dbs present, cannot scan: /tmp/spamd-28791-init/.spamassassin/bayes_tok

Re: [SAtalk] Possible error w/ whitelist score in 2.6.0

2003-09-24 Thread Cahya Wirawan
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 08:40:38PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote: > 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 Exerp

RE: [SAtalk] SPAM, BLOCK: Death of monkeys.com DNSbl (fwd)

2003-09-24 Thread Peter P. Benac
OR worse they'll attack SourceForge!!! > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 16:04 > To: SATalk list > Cc: SATalk list > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] SPAM, BLOCK: Death of monkeys.com D

Re: [SAtalk] Dumb question: where to get DB_File

2003-09-24 Thread Jack Gostl
I tried to do an "install DB_File" and got an error. It say: "version.c", line 30.10: 1506-296 (S) #include file not found" On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, mikea wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 12:00:55PM -0500, Chris Barnes wrote: > > I am about to upgrade fro SA2.6 (pre-rc1) to SA2.6 final release. I

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes upgrade from 2.55 to 2.60?

2003-09-24 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 01:53:36PM -0500, Genchev, Sergei wrote: > Since there have been "significant changes in BAYES" for 2.60, when I > upgrade to 2.60 from 2.55: > > - will the upgrade keep my old BAYES database (in DB_file format)? > - would I have to do any rebuilding/reindexing/whatever

Re: [SAtalk] bayes looking to wrong directory

2003-09-24 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 04:43:26PM -0400, Jon Fraley wrote: > It should be looking in /home/stopspam/.spamassassin. Can anyone tell > me how to rectify this? The debug output is from the initial compilation run and can be ignored. As long as the next message you push through uses the right path.

RE: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?

2003-09-24 Thread Stephen Reese
how do I turn up the MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Comboni Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 9:07 AM To: Dale Harris Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?

[SAtalk] SA 2.60 and Perl

2003-09-24 Thread Jim Knuth
Hallo SA-List, is the version SA 2.60 only for perl 5.0.8? -- Viele Grüße, Best regards Jim Knuth [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Zitat -- Im Italienischen gibt es nur vier Worte die mit "h" beginnen. --- This sf.net email is sponsor

Re: [SAtalk] SA 2.60 and Perl

2003-09-24 Thread Jim Knuth
Hallo Theo Van Dinter, am Mittwoch, 24. September 2003, 21:39:01, schriebst Du: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 09:10:00PM +0200, Jim Knuth wrote: >> is the version SA 2.60 only for perl 5.0.8? > err. 5.8.0 perhaps? > anyway, 2.60 will run on anything 5.005 or later. (tested on 5.005, 5.6.0, 5.6.1

[SAtalk] Re: razor2 check skipped: Bad file descriptor

2003-09-24 Thread Bernd Kuhls
On Mi 24 Sep 2003 09:00:17p Dan Wilder wrote: > razor2 check skipped: Hi, did you apply the Razor patches contained in SA 2.60? Greetings, Bernd --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/s

Re: [SAtalk] Copies of outgoing emails

2003-09-24 Thread Paul Gregoire
I got your message, i have commented out 2 lines (12 & 43) in my master.cf Now everything except SA is running fine again.. no copies, no parroting.. I never meant to say SA could send mail just that when i enabled it (uncommented the 2 lines and commented the original "smtp") wierd stuff started h

Re: [SAtalk] SPAM, BLOCK: Death of monkeys.com DNSbl (fwd)

2003-09-24 Thread wrolf . courtney
How about as zone files on SourceForge? We could get updates via "cvs update". Maybe even via "rsync -e ssh", if there is a way of doing that with SourceForge. This would force spammers who want to attack us, to attack the entire open source community. Wrolf Courtney Donovan Data Systems, I

[SAtalk] Re: razor2 check skipped: Bad file descriptor

2003-09-24 Thread Marcus Frings
* Dan Wilder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > razor2 check skipped: > Bad file descriptor Insecure dependency in connect while > running setuid at /usr/lib/perl/5.6.1/IO/Socket.pm line 108, > line 1438. > Versions: > Perl 5.6.1 (Debian Woody stock, will upgrade if I must) > Mail::Spa

[SAtalk] Re: Anyone using DCCifd?

2003-09-24 Thread Bernd Kuhls
On Mi 24 Sep 2003 06:21:34p Ed Kasky wrote: > >debug: DCCifd is not available: no r/w dccifd socket found. Hi, I got this, too despite a running dccifd: Sep 24 16:03:23 router dccifd[861]: 1.2.7 listening to /etc/apache/mail/dcc/dccifd srw-rw-rw- 1 root root0 Sep 24 20:04 dc

[SAtalk] Spam learnt as Ham ?

2003-09-24 Thread Thomas Mechtersheimer
Hi ! I'm using SpamAssassin 2.60 with autolearning. Today I received one of the usual penis pill advertisments, which triggered: | X-Spam-Flag: YES | X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on | cslmail.nrw.net | X-Spam-Report: | * 5.4 BAYES_99 BODY: Bay

[SAtalk] install problem

2003-09-24 Thread Pat Smith
I installed spam assassin, received no info about a password, no instructions, etc. and I paid for the supported version. It asks for the location of prefs.js file, what do I put in here? Pat --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Wel

Re: [SAtalk] SA 2.60 and Perl

2003-09-24 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 09:10:00PM +0200, Jim Knuth wrote: > is the version SA 2.60 only for perl 5.0.8? err. 5.8.0 perhaps? anyway, 2.60 will run on anything 5.005 or later. (tested on 5.005, 5.6.0, 5.6.1, and 5.8.0) 2.70, however, will only be 5.6.1 and later. -- Randomly Generated Tagli

RE: [SAtalk] Alt spam scanning products

2003-09-24 Thread Luzynski, Steve
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:spamassassin- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Blaise > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 11:44 AM > To: 'Spam Assassin' > Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Alt spam scanning products > > > Has anyone used ActiveState's (recently bo

Re: [SAtalk] lots of false positives in 2.60

2003-09-24 Thread Martin Radford
At Wed Sep 24 08:32:18 2003, Steve Simitzis wrote: > ever since i upgraded from 2.55 to 2.60, i've had lots of problems > with mailing lists getting marked as spam. specifically, any yahoo > group mailing list i'm on is getting treated as spam. > > i looked into this further, and it seems that th

Re: [SAtalk] SPAM, BLOCK: Death of monkeys.com DNSbl (fwd)

2003-09-24 Thread Forrest Aldrich
A new approach to DNSBL might be considered, where there is a peer-to-peer sharing (authentication, scoring whatever) that mirrors content -- something of that nature, whereby the hackers would basically have to DDos the entire internet to prevent its use. Not sure how such a framework could

RE: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?

2003-09-24 Thread Larry Gilson
> -Original Message- > From: BG Mahesh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 1:37 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ? > > > > Well they were being passed straight to the user since the > > courier m

[SAtalk] USER_IN_WHITELIST

2003-09-24 Thread Cliff Browning
Exactly how do you use this test. Is there supposed to be a file with a list that it looks at? --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ S

[SAtalk] Bayes upgrade from 2.55 to 2.60?

2003-09-24 Thread Genchev, Sergei
Since there have been "significant changes in BAYES" for 2.60, when I upgrade to 2.60 from 2.55: - will the upgrade keep my old BAYES database (in DB_file format)? - would I have to do any rebuilding/reindexing/whatever of the database? - Did anybody have problems with BAYES after upgrading to

[SAtalk] razor2 check skipped: Bad file descriptor

2003-09-24 Thread Dan Wilder
I'm running spamd as root on a dedicated Linux host accepting connections from spamc elsewhere on a LAN. It is desireable in this application to allow spamc to setuid to user IDs as it processes email. I'm seeing messages in my logfile containing (wrapped for readability): razor2 check skippe

[SAtalk] RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK problem

2003-09-24 Thread Terry Milnes
This may be a little difficult to explain but here goes. All of my systems are behind a nat box. My mail server OS is linux, using qmail/vpopmail/mysql procmail etc.etc.. Upgraded to Spamassassin V 2.60 rc6 (the day before the final release) My daughter's system is on the same network as my mai

Re: [SAtalk] Dumb question: where to get DB_File

2003-09-24 Thread mikea
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 12:00:55PM -0500, Chris Barnes wrote: > I am about to upgrade fro SA2.6 (pre-rc1) to SA2.6 final release. I see > in the docs that if I want to continue to use Bayes, I have to install > DB_File and run "sa-learn --import". > > Ok, doesn't sound too bad. > > But where do

Re: [SAtalk] Dumb question: where to get DB_File

2003-09-24 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 12:00:55PM -0500, Chris Barnes wrote: > But where do I get DB_File? (RH 8) I would think RH8 either already installed it for you (rpm -q perl-DB_File), or you could grab the RPM. -- Randomly Generated Tagline: "The Internet treats censorship like damage and routes around

[SAtalk] Dumb question: where to get DB_File

2003-09-24 Thread Chris Barnes
I am about to upgrade fro SA2.6 (pre-rc1) to SA2.6 final release. I see in the docs that if I want to continue to use Bayes, I have to install DB_File and run "sa-learn --import". Ok, doesn't sound too bad. But where do I get DB_File? (RH 8) -- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

RE: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?

2003-09-24 Thread BG Mahesh
> Well they were being passed straight to the user since the courier > mailfilter file was picking them out due to the size being > than 24kb > so there was no chance for SA to parse them. > hi Not sure if the rules we have added in local.cf are wrong. We are using SA+procmail header LATEST_N

RE: [SAtalk] Alt spam scanning products

2003-09-24 Thread Chris Blaise
Has anyone used ActiveState's (recently bought by Sophos) PureMessage anti-spam package? If so, what did you think of it? Or even if you've heard anything about it, I'd be interested in that too. Chris --- This sf.net email is spo

Re: [SAtalk] Alt spam scanning products

2003-09-24 Thread Satya
On Sep 24, 2003 at 10:47, Yevgeniy Miretskiy wrote: >Has anybody used Postini (postini.com) spam scanning software? >I'm getting pressured from my management to evaluate postini >(as a potential replacement to SA), and would like to hear >from people who might have used this software... I would,

[SAtalk] Anyone using DCCifd?

2003-09-24 Thread Ed Kasky
I just installed 2.60 and while checking my install noticed the following: >debug: DCCifd is not available: no r/w dccifd socket found. I saw in the change logs that support was now built into SA and was wondering it it was worth the effort to get it running... Ed Kasky Los Angeles, CA . . .

Re: [SAtalk] sa-learning

2003-09-24 Thread Bart Schaefer
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Matt Kettler wrote: > The message must be _exactly_ the same as it originally was, headers and > all. Even very subtle changes can cause the bayes engine to learn things > you might not expect. You want it to learn about ham and spam, not about > forwarded message formats.

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes questions

2003-09-24 Thread Dave Kliczbor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tony Lill wrote: > I'm subscribed to some mailing lists that, for whatever reason, carry > a lot of spam. Before the Bayes went into spamassassin, it caught most > of this. Ever since, more's getting through, all with a BAYES_00 > score. I'm guessing i

Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 fails to install

2003-09-24 Thread Trevor Rhodes
Bob, Did as you suggested Bob, but still ended up with the following. Thanks for trying though. Checking if your kit is complete... Looks good Writing Makefile for Mail::SpamAssassin Makefile written by ExtUtils::MakeMaker 6.03 ==> Your Makefile has been rebuilt. <== ==> Please rerun the make c

Re: [SAtalk] 2.6.0 on CPAN -- when will it get there?

2003-09-24 Thread Bart Schaefer
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Vivek Khera wrote: > All CPAN does it automatically fetch, extract, make, test, and install > the module and any listed dependencies. That's not _quite_ all. It may also have stored system configuration defaults, like a non-standard PREFIX or the value of UNINST etc., which

[SAtalk] Mimedefang or Mailscanner?

2003-09-24 Thread John L
Good morning!  Hopefully, this is a simple question.   Which is the most efficient/effective piece of software?  Mimedefang or Mailscanner.   Running RH7.3/Sendmail/Spamassassin/Sophos Antivirus 1.2 Ghz 1.0 gb RAM About 900 mailboxes.   Thanks a million!   John

Re: [SAtalk] sa-learning

2003-09-24 Thread Matt Kettler
At 10:30 AM 9/24/03 -0400, Jon Fraley wrote: I just want to clarify this fact. I have seen contradictory statements posted. I am going to have users forward received spam and ham to respective accounts. Don't, unless they can forward the entire original message, complete with original headers, a

[SAtalk] Re: 2.60 fails to install

2003-09-24 Thread Malte S. Stretz
On Tuesday 01 January 2002 15:03 CET Trevor Rhodes wrote: > Hello again, > > I got that last email a little wrong. I should have added the output. > Here it is... > > Makefile out-of-date with respect to > /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi/Config.pm > /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.0/i386-linux-th

Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 fails to install

2003-09-24 Thread Bart Schaefer
On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Trevor Rhodes wrote: > While installing I get the following error. Anyone have any clue as to why > and what I can do? You could try resetting your system clock. Your mail had a Date: header of January 2, 2002. --- This

Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 fails to install

2003-09-24 Thread Trevor Rhodes
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:47 am, you wrote: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 12:28:59AM +1100, Trevor Rhodes wrote: > > While installing I get the following error. Anyone have any clue as to > > why and what I can do? > > It looks like you're missing the INSTALL file. Where did you get the > tarball from?

Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 fails to install

2003-09-24 Thread Bob Apthorpe
On Wed, 2 Jan 2002 00:28:59 +1100 Trevor Rhodes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While installing I get the following error. Anyone have any clue as to why > and what I can do? Looks like make can't find INSTALL. Try touch INSTALL followed by make clean perl Makefile.PL make and see if

Re: [SAtalk] monkeys.dom UPL being DDOSed to death (fwd)

2003-09-24 Thread Vivek Khera
> "BA" == Bob Apthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: BA> No, not unless Ron does something crazy like blacklisting 0.0.0.0/0. I BA> expect he'd give people fair warning first if he was going to do that. I BA> also expect it's going to take more than a DDoS to take out monkeys.com BA> permanently

Re: [SAtalk] Alt spam scanning products

2003-09-24 Thread Andreas Stollar
I tried to use it. It was expensive, as they were going to charge us per email box. Also it required that some qmail patches be applied to the qmail source tree in order for it to work. I use qmail-ldap, and the patch would not apply after applying the LDAP patch, and the LDAP patch would not a

Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 fails to install

2003-09-24 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 12:28:59AM +1100, Trevor Rhodes wrote: > While installing I get the following error. Anyone have any clue as to why > and what I can do? It looks like you're missing the INSTALL file. Where did you get the tarball from? I'd redownload it from http://spamassassin.org/rel

[SAtalk] 2.60 fails to install

2003-09-24 Thread Trevor Rhodes
Hello again, I got that last email a little wrong. I should have added the output. Here it is... Makefile out-of-date with respect to /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi/Config.pm /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi/CORE/config.h Cleaning current config before rebuilding Ma

[SAtalk] postfix aliases

2003-09-24 Thread Jerry Carter
I have Spamassassin working with postfix. I have a few aliases setup and notice that their mail is not checked by spamd. Does anyone know if this can be done? -- Thank You, Jerry Carter --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welco

[SAtalk] sa-learning

2003-09-24 Thread Jon Fraley
I just want to clarify this fact. I have seen contradictory statements posted. I am going to have users forward received spam and ham to respective accounts. Do I need to separate the original message from the forwarded message? I can understand not having to separate a message flagged as spam

Re: [SAtalk] 2.6.0 on CPAN -- when will it get there?

2003-09-24 Thread Vivek Khera
> "MRC" == Mark R Cervarich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MRC> Is downloading the tarball and installing it myself fundamentally MRC> different than just doing the install from CPAN? All CPAN does it automatically fetch, extract, make, test, and install the module and any listed dependencies.

[SAtalk] Alt spam scanning products

2003-09-24 Thread Yevgeniy Miretskiy
Hello, Has anybody used Postini (postini.com) spam scanning software? I'm getting pressured from my management to evaluate postini (as a potential replacement to SA), and would like to hear from people who might have used this software... -- Eugene Miretskiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> INVISION.COM,

[SAtalk] 2.60 fails to install

2003-09-24 Thread Trevor Rhodes
While installing I get the following error. Anyone have any clue as to why and what I can do? Checking if your kit is complete... Warning: the following files are missing in your kit: INSTALL Please inform the author. Writing Makefile for Mail::SpamAssassin M

[SAtalk] Re: Spamd domain sockets implementation

2003-09-24 Thread Malte S. Stretz
On Tuesday 23 September 2003 23:00 CET Mike Loiterman wrote: > > 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

Re: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?

2003-09-24 Thread Scott Comboni
This has seemed to work for me as well. Like you pointed out the ones that have no .exe still manage to get in. Scott On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 20:46, Dale Harris wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:37:27AM +1200, Simon Byrnand elucidated: > > > > Although I havn't tried it, I would say that teac

was Re: [SAtalk] Interesting discovery re: spamassassin/mimedefang/sendail.)

2003-09-24 Thread willie
I use a MS OS desktop at home (at work I use Solaris and Redhat Linux)and have not put a virus scanner on it in over 3 years, and have not caught a virus yet. I HAVE received them but I choose not to use security risk software such as: Internet Explorer or any version of Outlook. I also make grea

[SAtalk] Re: Spamd domain sockets implementation

2003-09-24 Thread Malte S. Stretz
On Tuesday 23 September 2003 19:28 CET Kenneth Porter wrote: > --On Tuesday, September 23, 2003 6:48 AM + Jim > If this is the recommended configuration, then I would suggest that 2.61 > change the spec file to make use of this in RPM-based installations. The problem is that currently using th

  1   2   >