I moderate a mailing list that's hosted off of a third-party server to
which I don't have direct access (beyond the simplistic web-interface of
the list-management software). The list is (and must be) open to mail
from non-members, and thus collects huge amounts of spam.
My plan for fixing this w
In the past week or so, I've had a string of spam messages that were flagged
as BAYES_00. At a glance, I haven't been able to see anything obvious that
would have earned that rating, but I don't really want to go through all of
the tokens in the database by hand.
Is there a way to get SA to retu
In the past week or so, I've had a string of spam messages that were flagged
as BAYES_00. At a glance, I haven't been able to see anything obvious that
would have earned that rating, but I don't really want to go through all of
the tokens in the database by hand.
A simple Bayes-poisoned message I'
Presently, because of limited system resources, I've set a very conservative
max-scan-size for spamc - I don't want to burden the system with grinding
through those large files. However, this generally means that large messages
come straight through :)
In almost all cases, very large messages get
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 11:38:59AM -0400 or thereabouts, Chris Santerre wrote:
>
> Sorry, but SA doesn't deliver emails. I don't think it ever will, and I
> think that is good. I feel your pain on what you want to do. But SA won't do
> it. Why not just setup an alias or something? I'm not familiar
> On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:26:22 -0400 (EDT)
> Satya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 1, 2003 at 00:03, Nigel Wilkinson wrote:
> >
> > >I want to filter useing the number of asterixes in the X-Spam-Level
> > >header but I think this is a wildcard in procmail. Does anyone know
> > >if this wi
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 12:00:41PM -0400 or thereabouts, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 08:55:08AM -0700, John Schneider wrote:
> > I have been working too much lately, so my eyes might be a little
> > crossed But, the following message seems to have met the required value
> >
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 09:42:31AM -0400 or thereabouts, Jennifer Fountain wrote:
> Is there anyway to configure SA to not check spam status for certain
> mailboxes? IE: my hr dept wants their resume acct not tag any email as
> spam - regardless. I guess - is there a way to whitelist recepients?
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 06:15:29PM +0100 or thereabouts, Jonathan Allen wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> A simple question. I have just installed SA2.6 and have been teaching
> it about spam with sa-learn. How do I turn on the Bayesian checking
> so that the learning is put to good use ?
In local.cf:
use_
My mail box is an old clunker, hauled out of the closet and put back into
service...it's a P-200, running RH9. My current configuration has spamc
called on arriving messages via the global procmailrc, prior to delivery -
single shared database for all users. Unfortunately, due to the way mail
arriv
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 09:40:45AM -0500 or thereabouts, Mike Carlson wrote:
> I am trying to figure out a way to do something similar.
>
> I have it setup to use 5.5 as the minimum score. If it scores between 5.5
> and 10 it goes to the recipient as flagged spam, if it is between 10 and 15
> it w
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 11:44:28PM -0700 or thereabouts, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Sean McCrohan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This is my first week with SpamAssassin, so I may be missing something
> > obvious, but the message I've attached sections of below puzzled me.
This is my first week with SpamAssassin, so I may be missing something
obvious, but the message I've attached sections of below puzzled me.
While the body report scores it at 7.1 points, the X-Spam-Status in
the header only gives it 1.8 - this is the first time I've seen the
two differ. Is this c
13 matches
Mail list logo
