Keith,
Look through the archives. Somebody posted an answer to this before.
Basically, what they did, was follow the "simple" configuration
described in the README.filter and in the shell script they used
"spamc". I don't know that anyone has used spamproxyd, but the trick is
that yo
Folks,
I'm trying to make a webpage where my users can submit SPAM, click a
button, and it's automagically router to sightings and spamcop.
Well, when I test this with a recent spam that slipped through, I
found that SF is reject mail based on bogus "From:" headers.
Generally, that's
Mark wrote:
> Dear people,
>
> I have been trying to put mail from *groups.yahoo.com to the white_list. I
> added an entry like this:
>
> whitelist_from *groups.yahoo.com
>
> But mail coming from those groups are still flagged as spam. Naturally
> groups.yahoo.com is not in the sender From: a
Daniel Pittman wrote:
[...]
> It's not reliable enough in the face of:
>
> * NAT
> * Any MTA that fails to insert a received line.
> * fetchmail
>
> The last will screw up, too, because it has a hop to the ISP SMTP
> listener, then a pickup from the ISP POP3 host and delivery to the local
> ma
Charlie Watts wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Donald Greer wrote:
>
>>Charlie Watts wrote:
>>
>>>That sounds like blocking that would be better done outside of
>>>SpamAssassin.
>>>
>> Maybe I wasn't clear. What I was trying to des
Charlie Watts wrote:
> That sounds like blocking that would be better done outside of
> SpamAssassin.
Maybe I wasn't clear. What I was trying to describe was a system
where by the "Auto Whitelist" would _suggest_ address to be added to a
user's whitelist, but _NOT_ automagically add them a
Charlie Watts wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Shane Williams wrote:
>
>
>>On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, dman wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 12:13:29PM -0600, Donald Greer wrote:
>>>[...]
>>>| Basically, the first time email is recieved from
One potential new check would be for "Received:" sequences. E.G.
that there's no message with a "Received: from XXX by YYY" followed by
"Received: from WWW by ZZZ". If ZZZ received the message, then ZZZ
should have sent it on the next hop ( or atleast something with the same
IP address a
Folks,
Take a look at "http://www.paganini.net/ask/";. This is a discription
of how "Active Spam Killer" works. Could be useful as an option for
auto whitelisting.
Basically, the first time email is recieved from somebody, they are
sent a message asking them to confirm their identity
Need to add the following to spamd to make the usernames appear
correctly in the logs and perform SQL lookups when using the -x option
and/or when the userids aren't in /etc/password:
--- spamd.orig Tue Jan 29 11:19:17 2002
+++ spamd Tue Jan 29 11:19:24 2002
@@ -517,8 +517,9 @@
sub
Folks,
The current scoring for HTML_Only mail may be just a little high.
I've recieved reports that some newsletters (which are html-only) are
being rejected as spam. Specifically I allow my users to signup to news
letters from "cluebie.com" (see "http://austintx.cluebie.com"; if you
wa
Folks,
I don't know if it's possible (I sure don't know how to do it myseld
;^) but perhaps one could take a known spam database and a known
non-spam database and use these to automatically build a list of
possible "spammish" words (sorta like the GA, but actually finding the
words and p
CertaintyTech - Ed Henderson wrote:
> I have been testing the auto_whitelist (AWL) feature sitewide in a single
> database and have come to realize that it does have a downside - namely that
> if false negatives get thru then eventually their address is added to the
> AWL and then SA will never c
Quick suggestion: Rather than having to modify SpamAssassin.PM to
use Dir/DB Based AWL, why not make it an option and, depending on how
the option is set, eval the appropriate statements to get the module
installed? I've seen this done on a few things before, just don't
remember where. H
Bob Proulx wrote:
>>You seem to believe that RPMs and other package tools require versions of
>>the form x.y.z. Although I know nothing about RPMs, I know Debian finds
>>2.01 as a perfectly acceptable version number.
>>
>
> Yes a perfectly acceptable version number. But which version is the
>
Quick patch so that user is reported correctly for SQL-only configs.
Without this, if you use "-q -x" and your user doesn't exist in
/etc/passwd, you get "unknown"... not very helpful ;^).
Don
--- spamd.orig Tue Jan 29 11:19:17 2002
+++ spamd Tue Jan 29 11:19:24 2002
@@ -517,8 +5
Duncan Findlay wrote:
[...]
>
> The only thing is that we tend to have new features ready for release much
> faster, rather than waiting for hundreds of them, so this would be a
> problem, new features that are quite stable don't get to the users fast
> enough.
>
>
Uh, based on Justin's n
Matt Sergeant wrote:
[...]
>>Um, 2.2.* is older than 2.14.*
>>
>>It's MAJOR.MINOR., not a decimal number. 2 is less than 14,
>>hence it's older.
>>
>
> No, this is Perl. Version numbers are floating point numbers. (yes I know
> it's a crap situation, but that's just how it works).
>
> Note:
line in place, because
updating cyrus won't fix that (cyrus is down-stream of SA).
All's well that ends well.
Don
Donald Greer wrote:
[...]
> As I said, at this point, I think my problem is my flakey Cyrus
> installation. I think that, once I get a current backup o
Justin Mason wrote:
[...]
> yep, I've just added that for 2.1devel. *just* missed the 2.0
> release ;)
>
> I've also fixed it to strip ^Ms from headers; it's valid, but as (someone)
> pointed out, it confuses Pine etc.
>
> --j.
>
>
It's ok, you can release it in "2.00.01" ;^).
Don
Justin,
That was my thought too, but they don't showup in vim and usually
they do. Also, deleting the header-seperating line and recreating it
doesn't fix it, and make the thing search for "^[:cntrl:]*$" doesn't fix
it, and _that_ should do it.
Or atleast, that's what the manual says
Charlie Watts wrote:
[...]
> LOL ... yeah, yeah. I'm having a braino sorta day. Getting over a 103
> degree fever. Influenza is no fun. LOL.
Bummer. Hope you're feeling better soon!
[...]
> Can you show your procmail recipes? Both the "pass-through" ones that work
> and the ones that se
Charlie Watts wrote:
[...]
>
> I've never used courier.
Me neither :^). I use Posfix & Cyrus.
>
> I'm still surprised that you had to make that change to begin with.
>
> Is this your mail flow?
>
> mta (which?) -> procmail -> cyrus "deliver"
Postfix->procmail->cyrus "deliver"
>
>
Well, I found a work-around. I don't know that it's the best way to
fix it, but...
If anyone wants to tell me if this is not an acceptable solution
(e.g. it'll reject valid headers or accept invalid headers) please let
me know.
Otherwise, it seams to work, so onward and upward!
Her
Ok,
I've been banging my head against this thing, and it looks like the
line 94 in NoMailAudit.pm is not doing it's job for some reason.
The line is as follows:
if (/^$/) { last; }
Well, that seams straight forward enough!
What's puzzling is that it works FINE on the samp
Nope. I had tried that before, but I tried it again with the same
result.
Here's what I've removed:
/usr/lib/perl5/siteperl/5.6.1/spamassassin.*
/usr/lib/perl5/siteperl/5.6.1/Mail/SpamAssassin*
/usr/share/spamassassin
/etc/spamassassin*
/etc/mail/spamassassin
/root/.spamassassin*
/usr/bin/
26 matches
Mail list logo
