.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on cfcl.com
>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=1.0 tests=BAYES_00,
> UNWANTED_LANGUAGE_BODY autolearn=ham version=2.60
>X-Spam-Level:
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZJourneyman Sourceror:
P.O. Box 1269 zz |\ _,,,---,,_ S
ed=1.0 tests=BAYES_00,
> UNWANTED_LANGUAGE_BODY autolearn=ham version=2.60
>X-Spam-Level:
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZJourneyman Sourceror:
P.O. Box 1269 zz |\ _,,,---,,_ Scripts & Philtres
San Bruno, CA 94066 zz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_ Per
e also seeing errors in the procmail log file for this user:
procmail: Rescue of unfiltered data succeeded
procmail: Terminating prematurely whilst waiting for lockfile "sa_rdm.lock"
procmail: Terminating prematurely whilst waiting for lockfile "sa_rdm.lock"
...
Suggestion
my ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs
file should be running.
What am I (still) missing that used to work in 2.43 before I upgraded to 2.55?
Why are the tests in my user_prefs file no longer being run?
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZ Journeyman Sourceror:
P.O. Box 12
>
>See the "allow_user_rules" option in man Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf.
>
>Either turn that on, or put custom rules only in local.cf.
Thanks.
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZ Journeyman Sourceror:
P.O. Box 1269 zz |\ _,,,---,,_ Scripts
ough lists to know that someone else won't be as helpful...
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZ Journeyman Sourceror:
P.O. Box 1269 zz |\ _,,,---,,_ Scripts & Philtres
San Bruno, CA zz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_ Perl, Unix, MacOS
94066 US
At 11:13 -0400 2003-08-11, Matt Kettler wrote:
>At 11:45 PM 8/9/2003 -0700, Vicki Brown wrote:
>>Anyone now using 2.4* with options report_header or defang_mime should be
>>wary if you "upgrade".
>>Apparently these were both rolled into the new "report_safe fe
alling SpamAssassin 2.5.5.
Example #1
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 00:00:53 -0700
To: Vicki Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: X
Subject: Re: Little Thieves
Start SpamAssassin results
7.10 points, 2.3 required;
* 8.0 -- typical SPAM offer
* -0.4 -- BODY: Contains what looks like a quoted emai
ul of spamassassin syntax
errors, mysteriously introduced in my copy of the "standard" user_prefs file.
Does SpamAssassin have any kind of logging mechanism? For errors and success
only, not complete debugging diagnostics?
Robert - Thanks. I'll stop tearing out my hair now :)
--
heir procmailrc's. We do not
run spamd.
Therefore, the tests created in my ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs file should be
running.
What am I (still) missing that used to work in 2.43 before I upgraded to 2.55?
Why are the tests in my user_prefs file no longer being run?
--
-
>You want to add "report_safe 0" to your config file.
Thank you
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZ Journeyman Sourceror:
P.O. Box 1269 zz |\ _,,,---,,_ Scripts & Philtres
San Bruno, CA zz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_ Perl, U
to be ignoring my personal rules.
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZ Journeyman Sourceror:
P.O. Box 1269 zz |\ _,,,---,,_ Scripts & Philtres
San Bruno, CA zz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_ Perl, Unix, MacOS
94066 USA |,4-
At 12:45 -0700 2003-07-28, Vicki Brown wrote:
>At 07:44 -0400 2003-07-28, Gilson, Larry wrote:
>>You might want to read the FAQ below.
>>It does not specifically answer your question
>knowing a bit more about the precise class of problem (i.e. spammer is
>pretending to be i
might benefit you. If you can check, via your
>MTA or other like Procmail, that some combination of the header from,
>envelope from, and/or Received lines do not contain the proper information
This is what AWL is supposed to be doing; if AWL is not doing this properly,
a wor
3
X-Spam-Level:
score BIG_FONT 0.335
score FROM_AND_TO_SAME_51.314
score HTML_FONT_COLOR_RED 0.315
score HTTP_USERNAME_USED1.526
score LARGE_COLLECTION 0.203
score SPAM_PHRASE_05_08 1.640
score WEB_BUGS 3
At 18:26 +0200 2003-07-27, Tony Earnshaw wrote:
>Vicki Brown wrote:
>
>> Today two pieces of nasty x-rated spam came through the filters with
>>negative
>> scores because the spammer spoofed the From address to be _my_ address (the
>> address part only; the "real
tle for disabling the test
completely.
Do I simply set auto_whitelist_factor 0? Does that turn off AWL checking?
Is there a "better" solution?
Please Cc: responses to me as well as the list; I get the digest! Thanks.
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZ Journeyman Sourceror:
a shortcut for this very reason in 2.40 ;) Use
>"ToCc" as the header name and it should work. (should document this I
>guess ;)
Perfect (and to the doc... yes ;-)
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZ Journeyman Sourceror:
P.O. Box 1269 zz |\ _,,,
ut SpamAssassin creates a directory,
~/.spamassassin, and populates it with auto-whitelist.db and user_prefs.
So, is it ~/.spamassassin.cf or ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs or either or both?
Please Cc: me with any replies as I have subscribed to the digest.
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZ
Do "To:" rules check in "Cc: field as well?
That is, does SpamAssassin treat its To rules similarly to procmail's TO
rules?
I want to have a rule that checks for whether my real name is in the address;
mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" without the "Vicki Brown&q
.
--
- Vicki
Vicki Brown ZZZ Journeyman Sourceror:
P.O. Box 1269 zz |\ _,,,---,,_Scripts & Philtres
San Bruno, CA zz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_ Perl, Unix, MacOS
94066 USA |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-'
21 matches
Mail list logo
