I was thinking about adding a different way to pass user info to spamd, so
we wouldn't need all these hacks to lookup username for all the different
configurations.
I was thinking of adding a -D option to spamc which would be the path to
the users home directory.
Then spamd would be modified to t
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Arpi wrote:
> rawbody ASCII_FORM_ENTRY/[^<][A-Za-z][A-Za-z]+.{1,15}?\s+_{30,}/
>
> could someone please explain what does [^<] matches ?
> afaik ^ means beginning-of-line but it's strange in [] character array.
> so, what does ^ mean there? begin-of-line or '^' char
If we are going to continue to have a default whitelist that comes with
spamassassin, it might be worthwhile to have *@reports.spamcop.net to it
Before I had procmail filtering those seperately every spamcop message was
getting flagged by spamassassin since they have many spammy
characteristics (
On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, dman wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 09:12:23AM -0600, Shane Williams wrote:
> | I was looking at the porn expressions and scoring, and thought of an
> | idea to shoot by everybody.
> |
> | If I'm reading the PORN_3 rule correctly,
>
> I had set all the PORN_* rules to 10
I just received a piece of spam that slipped through because of the
whitelist.
Pertinent info:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-94.1 required=5.0
tests=NO_REAL_NAME,DEAR_SOMEBODY,
LINE_OF_YELLING,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,USER_IN_WHITELIST version=2.1
Since the default whitelist
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Cayce Will wrote:
> I downloaded and installed 2.0. When I ran the spamassassin -t test
> I got a weird error:
>
> enterprise# ./spamassassin -t < sample-spam.txt > spam.out
> Failed to run MISSING_HEADERS SpamAssassin test, skipping: (Can't
> locate object method "chec
