Re: [SAtalk] SMTPD_IN_RCVD test is unfair discrimination...?

2002-07-18 Thread Craig R . Hughes
TOTALSPAMNONSPAM 32142280 934 SMTPD_IN_RCVD So there's about twice as much spam as nonspam sent through that mail server. The way scores are set is related to the relative frequency of spam vs nonspam triggering a particular rule, but the optimizat

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft

2002-07-18 Thread Craig R . Hughes
I guess you missed the FAQ page which talks about how we're building an enterprise version which integrates to Exchange Server :) Probably about a month or so till we're into serious testing with our beta accounts; could be a bit longer till general availability. C On Thursday, July 18, 200

[SAtalk] I feel guilty

2002-07-18 Thread Craig R . Hughes
Hmm, does this count as spam? Deersoft announced today the release of their first SpamAssassin-derived product for windows: http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020718/180175_1.html Basically, an outlook plugin with an SA backend. Now Windows users can share the benefits of SA. For those of you who are

Re: [SAtalk] MX Values

2002-07-18 Thread Craig R . Hughes
Smarter spammers who are trying to avoid Postini etc. will also be smarter at avoiding our filters. C On Thursday, July 18, 2002, at 09:56 AM, Martin Nile wrote: > However it seems that a higher percentage of SPAM that slips in beneath > spamassassin came in via the secondary MX. -

Re: [SAtalk] MX Values

2002-07-18 Thread Craig R . Hughes
I think this is a side effect of the way Postini (and some others) do mail filtering for enterprises -- basically they sell a mail forwarding service, which you create as your low-score MX record, they scrub mail, then forward to your "real" mail server. The sales pitch says "If our service g

Re: [SAtalk] False Positive (non mailing list)

2002-07-15 Thread Craig R . Hughes
I vote for "liability for personal injury or death" -- how likely is a spammer to stick that in their messages? C On Sunday, July 14, 2002, at 11:47 AM, Suzanne Britton wrote: > In the many months I've been using SpamAssassin, I've only seen > one false > positive. I just checked it against

Re: [SAtalk] Whitelist

2002-07-14 Thread Craig R . Hughes
Whitelist entries can either be on separate lines, as Mike describes, or you can put multiple address patterns on one line, separated by whitespace. No quotes nor commas. C On Sunday, July 14, 2002, at 01:30 AM, Mike Burger wrote: > On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Chris Ogles wrote: > >> Can someone h

Re: [SAtalk] faked `From: whatever@amazon.com'

2002-07-14 Thread Craig R . Hughes
Jim, please forward the spam to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- they'll hopefully be able to deal with it. Thanks, C On Saturday, July 13, 2002, at 06:46 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: > FYI, > > I was dismayed to find obvious spam in my inbox today. > This came through with such a high score because amazon.

Re: [SAtalk] Not caught: Luis Boma $30M

2002-07-12 Thread Craig R . Hughes
On Friday, July 12, 2002, at 02:05 AM, Matt Sergeant wrote: > Andre Bonhote wrote: >> Hi SA-folks! >> This just dropped in this morning and got -0.3 hits. There might be >> something wrong somewhere. > > >> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.3 required=4.0 >> tests=DEAR_SOMEBODY,US_DOLLARS_2 version=2

Re: [SAtalk] Corrupt Header

2002-07-12 Thread Craig R . Hughes
I've long been of the philosophy that spamassassin should focus on exactly one thing: identification and tagging of spam. Leave the delivery to something which does delivery well. Leave the SMTP to something which does SMTP well. etc, etc, etc. I haven't chopped out the delivery stuff alto

Re: [SAtalk] OT Reverse spam.

2002-07-12 Thread Craig R . Hughes
That's probably illegal in a lot of jurisdictions. C On Thursday, July 11, 2002, at 04:13 PM, Jeremy Zawodny wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 01:34:19PM -0600, Mike Diehl wrote: >> >> The other day, I got this little jewel in my e-mail. So I >> decided to have a >> little fun. I sent a repl

[SAtalk] Happy Honeymoon to all!

2002-06-20 Thread Craig R Hughes
Ok folks, This is probably the last time I'll check list mail before I head out tonight. Have fun while I'm gone, keep up the good work, don't let the bedbugs bite, etc. See you all in 2 weeks. C --- Sponsored by: ThinkGeek at http://www.Th

Re: [SAtalk] Razor, SA in Slashdot article, Yahoo! News

2002-06-20 Thread Craig R Hughes
It also depends on the people. Some people definitely prefer easy-to-intall-and-configure worriless time-limited shareware to have-to-be-a-unix-sysadmin free (as in beer) software. Which is why we think DeerSoft can thrive by putting a lot of work into the free (beer and speech) SpamAssassin pro

Re: [SAtalk] Razor, SA in Slashdot article, Yahoo! News

2002-06-20 Thread Craig R Hughes
Matthew Cline wrote: MC> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/19/1335210&mode=thread&tid=111 MC> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/cn/20020619/tc_cn/937300&printer=1 MC> MC> CmdrTaco says that SA catches over a hundred spam a day for him; pretty good MC> publicity. The Razor for

[SAtalk] 2.31 released

2002-06-20 Thread Craig R Hughes
Ok, enough bugfixes and scorefixes to 2.30 are in, and it looks to be in good enough shape that I've packaged it up and released it. This is really a service release to get something a little better than 2.30 out, since I'm heading off tonight for my 2 week carribean honeymoon. First week, no te

Re: [SAtalk] Re: Re: spam filtering in high-volume environments

2002-06-18 Thread Craig R Hughes
Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote: DdH> On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 05:11:54PM +0200, Tobias von Koch wrote: DdH> | On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 09:30:06 -0500, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote: DdH> | DdH> | D> | Hmmm...would it be safe to assume that any attachment type of DdH> | D> text/| should be scanned while anyt

Re: [SAtalk] Re: spam filtering in high-volume environments

2002-06-18 Thread Craig R Hughes
I'm not so sure outlook won't display all kinds of weird stuff if it says it has a particular MIME type (and is maybe even encoded), if: a) there are no other parts b) the thing actually decodes to text, even if the MIME type is wrong c) the thing actually decodes to X (where X is MSWord, RTF, HT

Re: [SAtalk] Works well, scaringly so

2002-06-18 Thread Craig R Hughes
The original link is toast, but it looks to be archived at http://www.eatmycomix.com/02.02.13.html C Bob Proulx wrote: BP> > I started using SA, and now I worry why inbox is so empty. I guess I really BP> > only get spam. :) BP> BP> A few months ago a list reader posted a pointer to a cartoo

Re: [SAtalk] Whitelist servers

2002-06-18 Thread Craig R Hughes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Does anyone know a way of whitelisting mail from certain email servers? We > are trying to do this because originally we whitelisted our domain name, now > we are getting spams through with a forged source address from our domain > name. So we were thinking we could whi

Re: [SAtalk] razor v2

2002-06-18 Thread Craig R Hughes
I've checked in to the HEAD cvs branch a manual application of Theo's patch, so if you get the latest CVS along with the new Razor2, try it out and let me know if it's not working. C Theo Van Dinter wrote: TVD> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 11:39:07AM -0700, Craig R Hughes w

Re: [SAtalk] Re: Force spamd to reload the config?

2002-06-18 Thread Craig R Hughes
Actually, you would gain a tiny bit -- if a spamc call happens at the moment when spamd is dead and not yet re-listening on the port, then you'll have a message or two not filtered (depending on load and timing). If spamd re-reads its config file without stopping listening on the port, then thoug

Re: [SAtalk] Effort on Razor

2002-06-18 Thread Craig R Hughes
Plus Vipul seems to be pretty smart, so I'm betting that Razor will only get better and better with time. C Theo Van Dinter wrote: TVD> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 09:32:12AM -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote: TVD> > > Not sure why so much effort is given to Razor. TVD> > TVD> > I'm using neither Razor no

Re: [SAtalk] v2.30 shows version 2.20

2002-06-16 Thread Craig R Hughes
Did you restart spamd? C Christophe Zwecker wrote: CZ> Hi, CZ> CZ> I upgraded from 2.20 to 2.30, but below header shows version 2.20, is CZ> that normal or did something go wrong in my upgrade ? CZ> CZ> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=8.0 tests=FROM_AND_TO_SAME,AWL CZ> version=2.20 CZ> C

Re: [SAtalk] Fw: [Razor-users] Announce: Vipul's Razor v2

2002-06-16 Thread Craig R Hughes
Miles Fidelman wrote: MF> On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Simon Lyall wrote: MF> MF> Does the latest release of spamassassin support Razor v2 now? Not yet -- there are some errors which crop up when invoking Razor from spamd -- we're working with the Razor guys to resolve the problem. We have a patch read

Re: [SAtalk] Razor Compatability

2002-06-16 Thread Craig R Hughes
Great work Theo. Thanks! We'll probably want to make a 2.31 release with some updated scores and Razor 2 support asap. C Theo Van Dinter wrote: TVD> On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 04:39:25PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote: TVD> > I've sent in a patch to add support, but there were some bugs in the TVD

Re: [SAtalk] Evaluation of 2.30 GA scores

2002-06-16 Thread Craig R Hughes
It was probably me when I broght all the 2_3_0 line changes forward onto the trunk. C Daniel Quinlan wrote: DQ> Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DQ> DQ> > Hmm, I just did a "cvs up" (on the head, not the branch) and: DQ> > DQ> > score: FORGED_RCVD_TRAIL 1.000 -> absent DQ> > score: MSG

Re: [SAtalk] Evaluation of 2.30 GA scores

2002-06-15 Thread Craig R Hughes
Michael Moncur wrote: MM> When a new release comes out I like to be anal-retentive and go through the MM> GA second-guessing its scores. This is my report for 2.30. A valuable service we've come to count on. MM> - RATWARE must be fixed, it was negative last time MM> score RATWARE

Re: [SAtalk] Evaluation of 2.30 GA scores

2002-06-15 Thread Craig R Hughes
Daniel Quinlan wrote: DQ> >>> score X_NOT_PRESENT -1.920 DQ> >> DQ> >> This one is on my hitlist as well. Didn't work out very well. DQ> DQ> Craig R Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DQ> DQ> > But it actually turns o

Re: [SAtalk] Evaluation of 2.30 GA scores

2002-06-15 Thread Craig R Hughes
Daniel Quinlan wrote: DQ> Craig R Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DQ> DQ> >> score: BUGZILLA_BUG -2.000 -> 0.921 DQ> DQ> > Moved to the right section of the scores file, and score reverted to -2.0 DQ> DQ> But why is it positive? Doesn't it mean th

Re: [SAtalk] Evaluation of 2.30 GA scores

2002-06-15 Thread Craig R Hughes
Daniel Quinlan wrote: DQ> Michael Moncur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DQ> DQ> > And a few slightly questionable scores: DQ> > DQ> > - This was 0.87 before. Less and less useful? DQ> > score FROM_AND_TO_SAME -2.071 DQ> DQ> I think this one should go. It's a common way to send email t

Re: [SAtalk] Evaluation of 2.30 GA scores

2002-06-15 Thread Craig R Hughes
Bart Schaefer wrote: BS> These look suspicious: BS> BS> score: ASCII_FORM_ENTRY 0.036 -> -1.660 Changed back to 0.5 -- as mentioned in previous message, this is triggering on the sourceforge-appended footers on mailing list mails. BS> score: BUGZILLA_BUG -2.000 -> 0.921 Moved to the right sect

Re: [SAtalk] Release 2.30 (Viking dentist @ l'orange) announcement

2002-06-15 Thread Craig R Hughes
It's a missing use line, not a missing file. Add the following line to spamassassin.raw, among the other use lines at the top: use Pod::Usage; I've fixed this on the 2_3_0 CVS branch, so it'll be in 2.31 which might issue sometime next week. C Skip Montanaro wrote: SM> SM> Craig> Sp

Re: [SAtalk] Obfuscation escalation

2002-06-15 Thread Craig R Hughes
Rule added. C Skip Montanaro wrote: SM> rawbody OBFUSCATING_JAVASCRIPT /charCodeAt|fromCharCode/ SM> describe OBFUSCATING_JAVASCRIPT JavaScript which tries to hide the message ___ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Appl

Re: [SAtalk] Razor Compatability

2002-06-15 Thread Craig R Hughes
Razor2 support will be added to the CVS branch very soon, but will probably not be stable for a few days. C Matthew Cline wrote: MC> On Saturday 15 June 2002 12:47 am, Jim Scott wrote: MC> > Ok I have just installed on a new machine SpamAssassin 2.30 and Razor 2.x MC> > and SpamAssassin is repo

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft Emerges to Combat Spam

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
Dial-a-FAQ by Matt Cline :) Some quick answers (then I'm going home to sleep) Matthew Cline wrote: MC> I'm an editor at the Open Directory Project, so I'll submit the DeerSoft URL MC> to the appropriate category. To do that, I need to know if SpamAssasin Pro MC> is shareware or just normal pr

[SAtalk] Oops. Bad MANIFEST fixed.

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
Ok, I think I've fixed the MANIFEST problems now, so if you already grabbed 2.30 and it failed for you, try again now and you should be OK. C ___ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las V

RE: [SAtalk] Release 2.30 (Viking dentist ? l'orange) announcement

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
.sh KO> debian-rc-spamd.conf README.spamd-vpopmail solaris-rc-script.sh KO> KO> I'm trying to build this on Solaris 7 box running perl 5.6.1-multi-thread. KO> KO> I can see spamc code in 2.20, but not in this one. I've tried the tgz and KO> the zip files with no s

Re: [SAtalk] Release 2.30 (Viking dentist ˆ l'orange) announcement

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
Matthew Cline wrote: MC> On Friday 14 June 2002 05:49 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: MC> MC> > Viking: spam song MC> > Dentist: Tooth hurty MC> MC> Spam hurts your teeth? Think about it. C ___ Don&#x

Re: [SAtalk] Release 2.30 (Viking dentist ˆ l'orange) announcement

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
Matthew Cline wrote: MC> On Friday 14 June 2002 04:46 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: MC> MC> > Ok, 2.30 is now official. MC> MC> > SpamAssassin 2.30 (Viking dentist ˆ l'orange) Released! MC> > --- Viking:

Re: [SAtalk] [SA-announce] Deersoft Emerges to Combat Spam

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
> Was there supposed to be a Makefile.PL is the tar.gz file? BM> BM> Brian BM> BM> - Original Message ----- BM> From: "Craig R Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BM> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BM> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 4:48 PM BM> Subject: [SAtalk] [S

[SAtalk] Deersoft Emerges to Combat Spam

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
Press Release SOURCE: Deersoft, Inc. Deersoft Emerges to Combat Spam PALO ALTO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 12, 2002--Spam, unwanted and offensive email, is an overwhelming problem that many see getting worse every day. Spam not only wastes individuals' valuable time and attention every time t

[SAtalk] Release 2.30 (Viking dentist ˆ l'orange) announcement

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
Ok, 2.30 is now official. SpamAssassin 2.30 (Viking dentist ˆ l'orange) Released! --- Here's the super-brief summary of the major changes from 2.20: * Rule Fixes/Updates/Additions * Bugfixes/Typofixes * Speed improvements * New options

Re: [SAtalk] Fw: [Razor-users] Announce: Vipul's Razor v2

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
Not fully judged that way yet -- still about 5 minutes until 2.30 is released! C Duncan Findlay wrote: DF> On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 06:11:41PM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote: DF> > On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Simon Lyall wrote: DF> > DF> > Does the latest release of spamassassin support Razor v2 now? DF>

Re: [SAtalk] Cyrillic encoding raises the spam level to 3.8

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
2.30 coming Real Real Real Soon now! I'm just working through some last second packaging issues. C Matt Sergeant wrote: MS> Daniel Quinlan wrote: MS> > Michael Moncur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MS> > MS> > MS> >>I think the problem is simple: We have a SUBJ_FULL_OF_8BITS rule for 8-bit MS> >>

Re: [SAtalk] Re: Re: Re: C version

2002-06-14 Thread Craig R Hughes
Sean Rima wrote: SR> Actually RAM has always been a problem for me because it is not that SR> cheapo here, it pees me off when people say that they can get a strip SR> for $20 when I would be looking at 150+ :( Plus 17.5% VAT no doubt ;) C _

Re: [SAtalk] Re: Re: Re: C version

2002-06-13 Thread Craig R Hughes
Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote: DdH> OTOH, saying that DCC is I/O bound means that the limiting factor is DdH> bandwidth. In this case it is network bandwidth. You can put a DdH> super-powerful Athlon in that box, but DCC won't run any faster DdH> because it mostly sits idle waiting for data to co

Re: [SAtalk] C version

2002-06-13 Thread Craig R Hughes
Actually, using -a with -S should increase the false _negative_ rate, not the false positive rate, since it will lower the AWL score for a spammy sender to around 5. C Duncan Findlay wrote: DF> On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 02:34:54PM +0200, Michael Stauber wrote: DF> > Hi Craig, DF> > DF> > > The -S

Re: [SAtalk] Re: Re: spamc message size limits

2002-06-13 Thread Craig R Hughes
Bart Schaefer wrote: BS> Aside from the image attachments, the only identifying marks are extremely BS> poor written English. If they weren't so freaking huge, I'd read them for BS> the amusement value alone. Last time one slipped through, it included an BS> invitation to visit Mr. River's fact

Re: [SAtalk] problem with SA and Mail::Audit

2002-06-13 Thread Craig R Hughes
Mail::Audit doesn't let you change the contents of a mail message once it's created, which SA needs to be able to do easily. So we implemented our own more-or-less compatible Mail::Audit replacement, called Mail::SpamAssassin::NoMailAudit -- try using that class instead. C Jake Edge wrote: JE>

Re: [SAtalk] spamassassin on mac os x with CGP

2002-06-11 Thread Craig R Hughes
OSX startup stuff happens by running scripts called /Library/StartupItems/ProductName/ProductName -- sniff around in /Library/StartupItems/ and you'll see what I mean. If I get bored I might try making an OSX SpamAssassin package. C Ian Vännman wrote: IV> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:29:22 +020

Re: [SAtalk] Freeze for 2.30, call for nonspam.log submissions

2002-06-11 Thread Craig R Hughes
Excellent, thank Olivier! Great work on keeping up with the translations. C Olivier Nicole wrote: ON> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 19:39:47 +0700 (ICT) ON> From: Olivier Nicole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ON> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ON> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ON> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Freeze for 2.30, call for

Re: [SAtalk] Freeze for 2.30, call for nonspam.log submissions

2002-06-10 Thread Craig R Hughes
Matthew Cline wrote: MC> On Sunday 09 June 2002 11:09 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: MC> MC> > you are a nonspam.log submitter, please check out that tag from CVS using: MC> MC> Why just the nonspam.log? Cos I have plenty of spam to generate a very good spam.log -- all I need is

[SAtalk] Freeze for 2.30, call for nonspam.log submissions

2002-06-09 Thread Craig R Hughes
Ok, if anyone is about to submit a patch, it's time to do it. I'd like to get 2.30 out by wednesday, which is pretty aggressive, but things are pretty stable right now. Please don't anyone check anything in (those of you with commit privs). Instead, please attach any changes to a bugzilla ticke

Re: [SAtalk] Re: C version

2002-06-09 Thread Craig R Hughes
Sean Rima wrote: SR> But if I disable spamc in Exim (I used your example config) and leave SR> dcc only I never get above a load average of 2.3 and dccd is flooding SR> with remote servers as well, pointing out that I use spamd with -L. Actually, *not* using -L should *decrease* your load -- in

Re: [SAtalk] Re: C version

2002-06-09 Thread Craig R Hughes
Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote: DdH> On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 11:06:32PM +0100, Sean Rima wrote: DdH> DdH> | Yeah the spam[c/d] setup. My average is around 15 seconds, well it is an DdH> | old p133 the slowest appears to be 93 seconds. I am a dialup user and DdH> | when I go online off peak for the f

Re: [SAtalk] C version

2002-06-09 Thread Craig R Hughes
Sean Rima wrote: SR> I thought it would not affect me too much but even with a -m 2 and a -s SR> 61440 I reach a load average of over 15 which cripples my poor old mail SR> box :) Hmm, my understanding of "load" is "number of processes in the WAIT queue", which with -m 2 can only be 3 for SA --

Re: [SAtalk] C version

2002-06-09 Thread Craig R Hughes
The -S flag to spamd should also help greatly in constrained hardware situations. C Michael Stauber wrote: MS> Hi Sean, MS> MS> > My ISP is also looking at SA but performance maybe a problem. MS> MS> Yes, it sure can be. I've set up SA for a couple of ISPs on their Cobalt RaQ MS> servers. Those

Re: [SAtalk] Ammusingly misconfigured spam software

2002-06-09 Thread Craig R Hughes
I'm picturing some developer with a line like: print "Approved for $5000...For $user only..."; sending out a test message sees that it reads: Approved for ...For fred only... And saying to himself "Doh! $5000 is a bad variable -- I should use '' there!" --> print 'Approved for $5000...For $

Re: [SAtalk] Updating Rules

2002-06-07 Thread Craig R Hughes
Olivier Nicole wrote: ON> > The tricky part is maintaining a list of which rules will work only in CVS vs ON> > which rules are OK for the nightly distro. ON> ON> I beleive regexpr are stand alone. Not always -- for example when "rarebody" gets added as a regexp type. ON> I beleive most eval a

Re: [SAtalk] Average Spam Size?

2002-06-07 Thread Craig R Hughes
Jeremy Zawodny wrote: JZ> Does anyone with a large spam collection have good stats on the JZ> average message size? SizeCount - 0-1k89 1k-10k 57170 10k-50k 17062 50k-100k 530 100k-200k 282 200k-500k 128 500k-10M47 That's a

Re: [SAtalk] bug: spamd does not honour -s flag

2002-06-07 Thread Craig R Hughes
I answered this question first time you asked it. use -s mail not mail.info You set the facility, not the level of logging. C Steven Núñez wrote: SN> To be exactly, under OpenBSD 3.1, I am starting spamd with the following SN> command line: SN> SN> /usr/bin/spamd -d -a -c -s mail.info

Re: [SAtalk] Updating Rules

2002-06-07 Thread Craig R Hughes
rODbegbie wrote: r> Craig R Hughes wrote: r> > It's now r> > been quite a while since our last release, and so I'm going to do the r> > 2.30 release imminently. I will post a separate thread message with r> > the usual freeze request plus requests for n

Re: [SAtalk] Updating Rules

2002-06-06 Thread Craig R Hughes
Olivier Nicole wrote: ON> >The tricky part is that frequently between releases new rules get built which ON> >depend on new library features -- so CVS rules won't necessarily work on ON> >anything but CVS libs. Certainly at least EvalTests.pm would need to be in the ON> >"rules update" distro ON

Re: [SAtalk] Updating Rules

2002-06-06 Thread Craig R Hughes
Duncan Findlay wrote: DF> Would it not be easier to simply release the non-eval rules. Sure, DF> scores wouldn't be ideal. But hey, that's the price you pay :-) Yes, more or less. Except also excluding other rules like, say, uri rules before the 2.20 release, or "ok_languages", say. C __

Re: [SAtalk] help in deciphering a rule regex

2002-06-06 Thread Craig R Hughes
Hanser, Kevin wrote: HK> Hello, HK> A message that was sent from on of our mailservers was caught in a HK> spamassassin filter. (No, we don't send spam...) One of the items that was HK> caugh was "Message-Id is not valid, according to RFC-2822". I need some HK> help in deciphering the regex th

Re: [SAtalk] Mail::Audit with locally-installed SA?

2002-06-06 Thread Craig R Hughes
Jesse Sheidlower wrote: JS> What do I do to inform Mail::SpamAssassin where my rules directory JS> is for the local install? new Mail::SpamAssassin({ rules_filename => '/path/to/rules' }); It's called "filename" but it wants just the path, not the actual filename. C _

Re: [SAtalk] Updating Rules

2002-06-06 Thread Craig R Hughes
The tricky part is that frequently between releases new rules get built which depend on new library features -- so CVS rules won't necessarily work on anything but CVS libs. Certainly at least EvalTests.pm would need to be in the "rules update" distro, but probably also other stuff from time to t

Re: [SAtalk] About debug info and procmail or -D flag

2002-06-06 Thread Craig R Hughes
Just a final summary of what got checked in after all this back and forth: spamd -D [but not -d] will print SA debug messages to stderr and log its own activities to syslog (as before) spamd -D -d will log SA debug messages to syslog

Re: [SAtalk] Re: [SAdev] [Bug 390] New: Spamassassin does not use whitelist entries

2002-06-06 Thread Craig R Hughes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Craig R Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > BH> Just seems to me that if a program's logging, e.g., SA, is set to go to > > BH> the screen, then, unless it offers some sort of config. or switch, > > BH> there's

[SAtalk] Re: [SAdev] About debug info and procmail or -D flag

2002-06-06 Thread Craig R Hughes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > [Slaughtered Subject line ALERT: Not sure what this belongs under, > it showed up on my system sort of buggered up] > > Bryan Hoover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [...] > > >> STDOUT. If you specify -D and -d together, then spamd should > >> definitely install > >

Re: [SAtalk] Re: Missing TextCat.pm in current CVS

2002-06-05 Thread Craig R Hughes
Daniel, for sanity in installation for end users, can we do one of the following: a) keep the single-unified language file for the distribution, and just stick the component model files in a subdirectory under contrib, with the merge program under tools, but where those files are in MANIFEST.SKI

Re: [SAtalk] Sort-of OT - any perl gurus out there?

2002-06-05 Thread Craig R Hughes
perldoc IPC::Open2 C Steve Thomas wrote: ST> Anyone know how to open a file/command (open FOO, "|foo"), write to it and ST> then read back from it? It seems like something that would be needed fairly ST> often, although I can't say that I've run across the need for it in the ST> couple of years

Re: [SAtalk] Catching CAUCE NEWS

2002-06-05 Thread Craig R Hughes
Bryan Hoover wrote: BH> Ryan Hayle wrote: BH> BH> > * Progress of Senate anti-spam bill BH> > BH> > Over a year ago, Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) introduced S.630, the CAN BH> > SPAM Act of 2001. This bill would require UCE to have a valid return BH> > address to facilitate consumers' removal from sp

Re: [SAtalk] Re: [SAdev] [Bug 390] New: Spamassassin does not use whitelist entries

2002-06-05 Thread Craig R Hughes
Bryan Hoover wrote: BH> Craig R Hughes wrote: BH> BH> > SA when it was BH> > first built was not expecting to be used in a detached-daemon BH> > environment where BH> > its stderr was disconnected -- so when we disconnect it in spamd, it's BH> >

Re: [SAtalk] Missing TextCat.pm in current CVS

2002-06-05 Thread Craig R Hughes
Frickin' manifest. Ok, I updated it so tonight's build should work. C Bart Schaefer wrote: BS> On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote: BS> BS> > Don't know what to tell you guys -- TextCat.pm is definitely in CVS. BS> > Maybe there's some weird permi

Re: [SAtalk] Error output with latest CVS

2002-06-05 Thread Craig R Hughes
Yes, I just noticed this myself. I think it's a bug in the patch from Bugzilla #343 -- looks like a copy/paste bug -- how can you expect to read from a descriptor which perl just told you it failed to open... I'll delete that line. C Bart Schaefer wrote: BS> During "make test" (which BTW I t

Re: [SAtalk] Re: [SAdev] [Bug 390] New: Spamassassin does not use whitelist entries

2002-06-05 Thread Craig R Hughes
Bryan Hoover wrote: BH> Craig R Hughes wrote: BH> BH> > No, you can't just redirect STDERR, if you're using the -d flag, spamd BH> > will BH> > detach from the launching tty, and disconnect from that tty's STDERR, BH> > STDIN and BH> > STD

Re: [SAtalk] Forged yahoo.com in recieved

2002-06-05 Thread Craig R Hughes
No, it's worked out now, and fully operational in CVS. C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Craig R Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > There's a rule for that now in CVS. Any repeated word in all caps which is 3 or > > more letter long will trigger. > &

Re: [SAtalk] Missing TextCat.pm in current CVS

2002-06-05 Thread Craig R Hughes
Jan Chrillesen wrote: JC> On Tue, 04 Jun 2002, Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: JC> JC> > Try doing a cvs update. Or if you downloaded of the web site, try JC> > downloading again. (I.e. today's build rather than yesterday's) JC> JC> Same problem here. Both in the cvs snapshot downloaded

Re: [SAtalk] Re: [SAdev] [Bug 390] New: Spamassassin does not use whitelist entries

2002-06-05 Thread Craig R Hughes
Bryan Hoover wrote: BH> Craig R Hughes wrote: BH> > spamd is the thing which is detaching itself from the terminal and BH> > therefore losing SA debug messages; BH> BH> But these messages are dropped when SA is run from .procmailrc aren't BH> they? That is, aren&#

Re: [SAtalk] Re: [SAdev] [Bug 390] New: Spamassassin does not use whitelist entries

2002-06-04 Thread Craig R Hughes
usefully go -- in the case of spamd, that's syslog, through the logmsg() function defined in spamd C Bryan Hoover wrote: BH> Craig R Hughes wrote: BH> BH> > $SIG{__WARN__} = sub { logmsg($_[0]); } BH> > BH> BH> I assume you would add the above to spamd? Would it make

Re: [SAtalk] Preventing interception of a redelivery

2002-06-04 Thread Craig R Hughes
M. Brownsworth wrote: MB> Ah, sorry. My procmail is doing system-wide filtering and invokes MB> spamc. From /usr/local/etc/procmailrc: MB> MB> :0fw MB> | spamc MB> MB> :0: MB> * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes MB> /var/log/spam Ok, so why not just add a rule at the top of your procmail recipe which looks

Re: [SAtalk] Bug in SUBJ_HAS_UNIQ_ID

2002-06-04 Thread Craig R Hughes
Olivier Nicole wrote: ON> > I don't see how the Subject contains anything remotely like a unique ON> > ID code. Is this right? ON> ON> I did not check at the rule (too lazy.buzy) but maybe the unique ID is ON> characterised by some string at the end of Subject, after a lot of ON> spaces. Yes, 7

Re: [SAtalk] Forged yahoo.com in recieved

2002-06-04 Thread Craig R Hughes
Harry Putnam wrote: HP> Probably should go back to default, and see what I observe. The HP> first time around a message with FREE FREE in the subject and HP> several times in the body came thru, it may have been a fluke. There's a rule for that now in CVS. Any repeated word in all caps which

Re: [SAtalk] Forged yahoo.com in recieved

2002-06-04 Thread Craig R Hughes
Bart Schaefer wrote: BS> Hrm. This was reported once before, and I thought the description had BS> been updated then. Sorry, I should have checked. Ok, I just checked in a better description. C ___ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS A

Re: [SAtalk] Forged yahoo.com in recieved

2002-06-04 Thread Craig R Hughes
Harry Putnam wrote: HP> I've also had to edit a number of other rules score values so HP> probably just got off on the wrong foot. You're just not going to do a better job of optimizing scores than the GA will, though you might be seeing some "unusual" email that's not paralleling the corpus wel

Re: [SAtalk] Debug output

2002-06-04 Thread Craig R Hughes
Harry Putnam wrote: HP> Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: HP> HP> [...] HP> HP> >> Going to the debug output, how can I find the output that pertains to HP> >> that message? No date no msgid. HP> >> I don't see why its being overlooked either. Its not a restart HP> >> problem though.

Re: [SAtalk] CS: IBM säljer hårddiskverksamheten till Hitachi/Det lönar sig att satsa på personalen (fwd)

2002-06-04 Thread Craig R Hughes
Lars Hansson wrote: LH> On Wednesday 05 June 2002 00:20, Tony L. Svanstrom wrote: LH> > Looks like IT-news in swedish qualifies as part porn whenever something in LH> > the news ends (end in swedish == slut). =D LH> LH> Heh, I suspect the number 6 (sex in swedish) will have the same effect ;) I

Re: [SAtalk] Re: [SAdev] [Bug 390] New: Spamassassin does not use whitelist entries

2002-06-04 Thread Craig R Hughes
Bryan Hoover wrote: BH> Harry Putnam wrote: BH> BH> > So I think Duncan has hit it, in that -d (daemonize) silences the BH> > debug output. BH> BH> Indeed sir. I was woefully ignorant of the behavior. BH> BH> Does that mean too, that when spamd calls SA, SA does not log as usual? BH> My thought

[SAtalk] [OT] Looking for hosting

2002-06-04 Thread Craig R Hughes
SA folks As some of you may know from reading about it in Simson Garfinkel's recent column, or from other hints on the grapevine, I have recently incorporated a company to commercialize a product based on SpamAssassin. I will continue to dedicate a lot of time to the open source project; this is

freespeech Re: *****SPAM***** [SAtalk] Re: Spamassassin-talk digest,Vol 1 #456 - 14 msgs

2002-06-03 Thread Craig R Hughes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >= WECS.COM AUTOMATIC NOTICE = > > Dear SPAM proliferation victim, > > Your email to WECS.COM was identified as SPAM. This can happen because of > the email's content, its site origin, or bad or forged header information. Wecs.com person: please

Re: [SAtalk] Oops!

2002-06-02 Thread Craig R Hughes
If you look at a bug in bugzilla, in the header info at the top of the ticket, there's a link that says "Create an attachment". Click that, then follow the directions. C Olivier Nicole wrote: ON> >Olivier, could you attach the new file to a bugzilla ticket? It's hard to ON> >extract from your

Re: [SAtalk] How can I make spamassassin report line number or fullline verbatim

2002-06-02 Thread Craig R Hughes
This isn't a permanent answer, but you can do: perl -n -e 'if(/\b([a-Z]{3,}\b).*\1/) { print "$1 repeated: $_"; }' < message It would be neat to have the SA report give line numbers next to the rule descriptions. I like bug #384 C Duncan Findlay wrote: DF> On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 05:05:45PM

Re: [SAtalk] newbie: scoring FSCK

2002-06-02 Thread Craig R Hughes
I'm guessing the original author actually wants to blacklist the word fuck, but is too timid to actually type that to a mailing list of people (s)he doesn't know. C Andrew Kohlsmith wrote: AK> > I want to score FSCK more highly, and flag it as spam if it appears in AK> > the subject line. Can

Re: [SAtalk] Fake IPs

2002-06-02 Thread Craig R Hughes
Matt Thoene wrote: MT> Saturday, June 1, 2002, 9:21:37 PM, Bart Schaefer wrote: MT> > header FAKE_IP_RCVD Received =~ /\[0|(?:\d{1,3}\.){0,3}(?:2(?:5[6-9]|[6-9]\d)|[3-9]\d\d)[.\d]*\]/ MT> > describe FAKE_IP_RCVD Received via an impossible IP address MT> Shouldn't there be a score line in

Re: [SAtalk] scoring individual words

2002-06-02 Thread Craig R Hughes
Daniel, look in the wordfreqs/ directory of the distribution. C Daniel Quinlan wrote: DQ> Craig R Hughes writes: DQ> DQ> > Better than a straight dictionary of single words is a dictionary of DQ> > phrases, weighted by their frequency in spam vs nonspam. Hmm, wait, DQ> &

RE: [SAtalk] An amusing spamfooter

2002-06-02 Thread Craig R Hughes
It *is* in the documentation -- at least was just now when I read the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf manpage -- but then I'm behind on my email, so it might not have been there when you wrote this. ok_locales seems to be one of the better documented config options! C Michael Moncur wrote: MM> Daniel

Re: [SAtalk] Strange Headers...

2002-06-02 Thread Craig R Hughes
Mailing-List: gives a false-positive for me on the google-friend mailing list, The ant developers list (apache/jakarta), and a couple others. Looks like ezmlm inserts it, since many of the lines say "run by exmlm" at the end. I get a lot of X-EM-Version and X-EM-Registration as well, looks like

Re: [SAtalk] An amusing spamfooter

2002-06-02 Thread Craig R Hughes
I wonder how the ok_languages stuff would deal with that footer! C Jason Baker wrote: JB> This one got by with a 4.8/5... mostly in Korean, except for the footer. The JB> footer was worth having to read it though. :) JB> JB> > If you could't understand this language, please click the rejection

Re: [SAtalk] auto-whitelists

2002-06-02 Thread Craig R Hughes
Thanks for finding this bug Pete. I've just checked in the fix, which is that where it's still got auto_whitelist_threshold, it should have _factor C Pete Hanson wrote: PH> I've been looking at the auto-whitelist code trying to figure out if it is suitable for our environment, and it looks to

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >