At 02:08 PM 1/13/2004, Ricardo Kleemann wrote:
Can someone help me understand why it's being blacklisted?
The sender email address is
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Did you look at ALL the sender-related headers? blacklist_from doesn't just
look at "From:" it also looks at "Return-Path" "Reply-To" and others.
Hi,
I have a message sent by an address which has "offers" in
the email address. However this one in particular is one
that I don't want blacklisted.
I know I can add a whitelist rule, but really I'm trying to
figure out why SA is blacklisting the message.
The report shows a score of 100 from US
At 02:11 PM 1/12/2004, Ed Greenberg wrote:
I found in the rules that spamassassin ships a rule for checking against
bl.spamcop.net. In the score file, it gives this a zero weight,
encouraging you to give it some score if you donate.
Since I am a spamcop customer and feel justified in using them,
That's all you need to do. SpamAssassin doesn't actually run any tests that
have a score of 0, so the test was all set up and ready to be run, but disabled
(by the zero score). Changing that is all you need to do to enable it.
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Ed Greenberg wrote:
> I found in the rules that
I found in the rules that spamassassin ships a rule for checking against
bl.spamcop.net. In the score file, it gives this a zero weight, encouraging
you to give it some score if you donate.
Since I am a spamcop customer and feel justified in using them, I copied
the line:
score RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMC
--On Monday, January 05, 2004 3:55 PM -0800 Robert Menschel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> EP> Contact your ISP. SpamAssassin is a Unix based mail program, which
> cannot EP> do anything other than mark a mail as SPAM (it cannot move it,
> delete it, EP> etc).
>
> EP> If your ISP has configured Spa
Hello Giacinto Butindaro,
Monday, January 5, 2004, 1:12:36 PM, Evan responded to your email:
EP> --On Monday, January 05, 2004 10:00 PM +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I would like to ask a question about spam assassin. I have enabled spam
>> assassin on my mail box, and i have also enabled th
--On Monday, January 05, 2004 10:00 PM +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I would like to ask a question about spam assassin. I have enabled spam
> assassin on my mail box, and i have also enabled the spam box (by the
> way, i use Horde mail system). However, i can't view the spam box in my
> mai
I would like to ask a question about spam assassin.
I have enabled spam assassin on my mail box, and i have also enabled the spam
box (by the way, i use Horde mail system). However, i can't view the spam
box in my mail box. Where is it? How can i view this box? In other words i would
like to
Hi,
I would love to have an extra option '--check-socket-user' or similar
and let spamd check(or solely use) the uid of the spamc process but
ignoring any false"-u someotheruser" settings.
I have heard from one of our sys-admins the following:
If $client is a socket that has been generated with
On Wednesday 24 December 2003 09:27, Mike Kuentz (2) wrote:
> Hope that helps,
> Mike
Thanks very much. I'm learning and really appreciate everyone's help
---Michael
Merry Christmas!
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
At 09:49 AM 12/24/2003, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've started to see some spam with subjects like the following:
Satterwh, =?ISO-8859-1?B?bG93ZXN0IHByaWNlIGluc3VyYW5jZSB5ZXQu?=
This is an obvious attempt to hide the subject so that it won't
4, 2003 9:49 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Question re: Rule
>
>
> WARNING: Unsanitized content follows.
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I've started to see some spam with subjects like the following:
>
> Satterwh, =?I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've started to see some spam with subjects like the following:
Satterwh, =?ISO-8859-1?B?bG93ZXN0IHByaWNlIGluc3VyYW5jZSB5ZXQu?=
This is an obvious attempt to hide the subject so that it won't be caught by
rules. I tried to write a rule to tr
Justin England wrote the original PHP-SA. In short, after working on some
patches and fixing some things ages ago, Justin wasn't interested in
continuing the work. I forked the code and added my initials.
I would suggest if you want to create another fork that you consider my
vanilla code. There
riday, December 12, 2003 3:45 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Question on SUBJ_HAS_UNIQ_ID-test
>
>
> Joop,
>
> how come our SA 2.60 matches this subject-header:
>
> Subject: Opetusteknologia-valmistelua
>
> with SUBJ_HAS_UNIQ_ID-rule?
Joop,
how come our SA 2.60 matches this subject-header:
Subject: Opetusteknologia-valmistelua
with SUBJ_HAS_UNIQ_ID-rule?
The subject is perfectly legit finnish and doesn't seem that unique...
Thanks!
--
Mika Aleksandroff - IT Services, Kymenlaakso Polytechnic
--
All:
I think I saw an e-mail recently about the same problem I'm seeing with the
sa-stats.pl script. The script runs just fine, but all stats returned from
looking at /var/log/maillog are 0s.
Any ideas on what I might be doing wrong?
Essentially, I'm just calling sa-stats.pl as root from the co
On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 11:22:46 -0500
Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 09:06 AM 12/2/03 -0200, Marcio Merlone wrote:
> >But, as an end-user (I sys-admin some thousands of mail accounts), I
> >think that the rules could be forked from SA, so community could
> >treat SA as a spam-scanning e
At 09:06 AM 12/2/03 -0200, Marcio Merlone wrote:
But, as an end-user (I sys-admin some thousands of mail accounts), I
think that the rules could be forked from SA, so community could treat
SA as a spam-scanning engine and the rules would be the spam database,
like an anti-virus package. This would
t; - Willy
Wonka
> -Original Message-
> From: Marcio Merlone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 6:07 AM
> To: SA List
> Subject: [SAtalk] Question (proposal?) about SA dev and its rules
> update.
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> I'
Hello all,
I've been using SA for some months now with great success. Its rule
scheme is very efficient and straight-forward when you learn some
regexp.
But, as an end-user (I sys-admin some thousands of mail accounts), I
think that the rules could be forked from SA, so community could treat
SA a
Hello SA users,
I have SA installed and working fine with mysql database. According to
sa docs, must exist a PHP Interface called "php-sa-mysql-n.n" which can
be downloaded from http://spamassassin.org/devel/...
I checked out this URL, and not found what i'm looking for. Asking
google about i
Paul Hirschorn wrote:
I have been working on a variety of scenarios of how to handle per user spam
prefs on a mail gateway machine. Through trial and error found a couple of
interesting things. In order to user prefs to be read from SQL I need to
invoke the -u "username" flag in spamc. I have my
I have been working on a variety of scenarios of how to handle per user spam
prefs on a mail gateway machine. Through trial and error found a couple of
interesting things. In order to user prefs to be read from SQL I need to
invoke the -u "username" flag in spamc. I have my SQL tables setup and
http://www.exit0.us/index.php/CustomRBLs
This page explains how to add your own RTBLs.
Frederic Tarasevicius
Internet Information Services, Inc.
http://www.i-is.com/
Nigel Featherston wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to know if SpamAssassin uses the following blacklists:
>
> rhsbl.ahbl.org
Hello,
I would like to know if SpamAssassin uses the following blacklists:
rhsbl.ahbl.org
dnsbl.ahbl.org
And I would also like to know under what conditions they are enabled
(i.e. by default, etc.)
Thank you very much,
Nigel Featherston
---
Original Message-
From: Gustafson, Tim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 12:24
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: [SAtalk] Question Re: SpamAssassin Port on FreeBSD 4.9
Hello
I have installed SpamAssassin from the FreeBSD port
(/usr/ports/mail/spamass-milter
Hello
I have installed SpamAssassin from the FreeBSD port
(/usr/ports/mail/spamass-milter/) and it is generally working fine. I tried
to set up SQL user preferences by adding the following to my
/usr/local/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf file (which I know is the correct
one because all the other
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jean-S=E9bastien_Guay-Leroux?= writes:
> What is the reason for Bayes in spamassassin to use the 150 most significant
> tokens in a email if Paul Graham mentions that you only should use the
> fifteen most significant ?
It got better results in empirical testing. Check back throug
nsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men." - Willy
Wonka
> -Original Message-
> From: Jason Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 2:09 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Question about my setup: Feedback please
>
What is the reason for Bayes in spamassassin to use
the 150 most significant tokens in a email if Paul Graham mentions that you
only should use the fifteen most significant ?
Quote from Paul Graham :
“Fourth, they calculated probabilities
differently. They used all the tokens, whereas
Hello everyone.
I just wanted to get some feedback regarding my particular setup with
postfix and SA.
Right now, I have a mail gateway server on my DMZ. Its running OpenBSD 3.3,
Postfix-2.0.16 and SpamAssassin 2.55, as well as spampd (which is working
great BTW).
I've setup SA on the gateway
Hello folks.
I'm a newbie to SA, so please be kind. :-)
I want to be able to install SA for personal use on my ISP's web server
(linuxwebhost.com) which is running "Red Hat Linux release 7.3
(Valhalla)".
This is as far as I have gotten:
% perl Makefile.PL PREFIX=~/sausr SYSCONFDIR=~/saetc
the
er 08, 2003 4:06 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: [SAtalk] Question about whitelist NOT AWL
I have been using SA for a long long time now and upgraded to 2.60 this
week.
I cannot figure out where to put my hard coded white/black lists now.
I use spamd/spamc and I know it read
I have been using SA for a long long time now and upgraded to 2.60 this
week.
I cannot figure out where to put my hard coded white/black lists now.
I use spamd/spamc and I know it reads the /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
file because
I can change the score and it shows up after a restart.
SA is
but now it seems to be working okay.
thanks to everyone
steve
-Original Message-
From: Colin A. Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 5:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Question about whitelist NOT AWL
Maybe you can give us more info about
Stephen Bradley wrote on Wed, 8 Oct 2003 17:45:42 -0400:
> BUT, if I put my black/white list entries in that file or any other file in
> the SA directories
> it will not work. None of the entries are read.
>
You *did* restart spamd, did you?
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web
D]'
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Question about whitelist NOT AWL
Thanks to Kai and Colin but I don't believe I made it clear with my other
post.
My whitelist is not working no matter where I put it.
The /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf file is working because I can change the
score value
2003 5:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Question about whitelist NOT AWL
Stephen Bradley wrote on Wed, 8 Oct 2003 16:06:14 -0400:
> I use spamd/spamc and I know it reads the /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
>
Just put all stuff in that directory! sa/spamd reads all files
Stephen Bradley wrote on Wed, 8 Oct 2003 16:06:14 -0400:
> I use spamd/spamc and I know it reads the /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
>
Just put all stuff in that directory! sa/spamd reads all files in there.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: htt
er 08, 2003 4:06 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: [SAtalk] Question about whitelist NOT AWL
I have been using SA for a long long time now and upgraded to 2.60 this
week.
I cannot figure out where to put my hard coded white/black lists now.
I use spamd/spamc and I know it read
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 04:06:14PM -0400, Stephen Bradley wrote:
> I cannot figure out where to put my hard coded white/black
> lists now.
>
> I use spamd/spamc and I know it reads the
> /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf file because I can change
> the score and it shows up after a restart.
>
> SA
I have been using SA for a long long time now and upgraded to 2.60 this
week.
I cannot figure out where to put my hard coded white/black lists now.
I use spamd/spamc and I know it reads the /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
file because
I can change the score and it shows up after a restart.
SA is
ustom written.
It just has to do with semantics. It is called Spamassassin, and that has to
be its main focus.
-Original Message-
From: Ivar Magne Auestad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 2:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SAtalk] Que
focus.
> -Original Message-
> From: Ivar Magne Auestad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 2:01 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Question for the FAQ
>
>
> You are writing in the FAQ that you don't focus on v
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 05:31:33PM -0400, Bruce Pennypacker wrote:
> The problem I'm finding with the latest worm is that sometimes the MIME
> attachment for the actual worm isn't included in the e-mail. I've
> already set MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE high but I'm still getting a few
> e-mails an hour
Jim wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:00:40PM +0500, Ivar Magne Auestad wrote:
You are writing in the FAQ that you don't focus on viruses, but I have a
suggestion. It would be very easy to add attachment type as a qualifyer.
Very many viruses are attached as .pif-files or double extention
attac
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:00:40PM +0500, Ivar Magne Auestad wrote:
> You are writing in the FAQ that you don't focus on viruses, but I have a
> suggestion. It would be very easy to add attachment type as a qualifyer.
> Very many viruses are attached as .pif-files or double extention
> attachmen
Absolutely.
www.exit0.us/index.php/VirusBounceRules
among other things.
-tom
> -Original Message-
> From: Ivar Magne Auestad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:01 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Qu
You are writing in the FAQ that you don't focus on viruses, but I have a
suggestion. It would be very easy to add attachment type as a qualifyer.
Very many viruses are attached as .pif-files or double extention
attachments (document.doc.exe) or refered to as inline mime code. This
would remove
Friend of mine and myself got into an argument about the website
GameSpy. In my past experience I've been spammed by GameSpy and have a bit
of a beef against them. They didn't do the spamming directly but instead
sold their registered user lists to a number of high volumn spamhaus groups
aft
Hi Jason,
comment in line,
Jason Williams wrote:
Good morning everyone.
I wanted to ask a couple of quick questions about installing SA and
running spamd.
From what i've read, I have two options to install SA: use perl -MCPAN
or download the source and install it.
My first question is about
Good morning everyone.
I wanted to ask a couple of quick questions about installing SA and running
spamd.
From what i've read, I have two options to install SA: use perl -MCPAN or
download the source and install it.
My first question is about perl -MCPAN. I have only used this a few times
and
At 12:07 PM 9/3/2003 -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
Is there something I can do to make mail addressed to a list address go
through SA?
I suspect you'll need to integrate SA at the MTA layer instead of procmail
to make this happen. Procmail is called as the mail is delivered to a local
user, but tha
I have a majordomo2 manager running. Spam comes in and goes to me and it
goes through procmail and spamassassin. All is good in the world.
The problem is that mail comes in bound for a list address and then it
doesn't go through SA. I'm hooked up via /etc/procmailrc:
DROPPRIVS=yes
:0fw
* < 256
ld be great.
I looked around on the web for some info on it but I couldn't really find any.
Thanks,
John McGivern
-Original Message-
From: Rick Macdougall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: August 22, 2003 8:45 AM
To: Thomas Skaret Larsen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Que
Hi Patrick,
> I cannot get spamc to pass the proper owner to spamd so it can pull out the
> proper userprefs out of the mysql db.
This seems to be a simple bug in the newly introduced code in
qmail-scanner. Edit sub-spamassassin.pl, and change:
$cmdline_recip=~/^([EMAIL PROTECTED])$/;
into:
I'm using qmail-scanner-1.20rc2 with spamassassin-2.60rc2 (mysql) and vpopmail-
5.3.24.
I cannot get spamc to pass the proper owner to spamd so it can pull out the
proper userprefs out of the mysql db.
I keep getting this in my maillog:
Aug 28 13:34:02 fbsd spamd[99929]: processing message
<
similar.
-Original Message-
From: Louis LeBlanc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 9:44 AM
To: SpamAssassin Talk
Subject: [SAtalk] question/idea for whitelisted sender handling
Hey all. With all the noise about Osirusoft, my mail server is
practically on its
Hey all. With all the noise about Osirusoft, my mail server is
practically on its knees. I actually had to shut off network tests
for a few minutes to recover.
Anyway, thinking about this gave me an idea. I know that when SA
finds a message in the whitelist, it pretty much guarantees the
messag
>
> Simon Byrnand writes:
>> I was just thinking about the GA process and although I havn't looked at
>> it to see exactly how it works, I was wondering the following
>>
>> Presumably it starts with a certain scoreset, runs the spam through,
>> sees
>> what percentage score above 5, then runs t
Simon Byrnand writes:
> I was just thinking about the GA process and although I havn't looked at
> it to see exactly how it works, I was wondering the following
>
> Presumably it starts with a certain scoreset, runs the spam through, sees
> what percentage score above 5, then runs the ham thr
>The biggest problem with a score based system with an abrupt cutoff is the
>uncertainty around the threshold. If the GA currently thinks its ok for a
>ham to score 4.9 and still be called ham, and a spam to score 5.1 and
>still be called spam, its not going to make as much effort to get a
>cleaner
I was just thinking about the GA process and although I havn't looked at
it to see exactly how it works, I was wondering the following
Presumably it starts with a certain scoreset, runs the spam through, sees
what percentage score above 5, then runs the ham through and sees what
percentage sco
Hi,
Thomas Skaret Larsen wrote:
anyone know how to enable spamassassin PER domain. in an easy way. and
how can i use spamassassin without using qmail-scanner and not need to
recompile my qmail install with the qmailqueue patch.,
Add the followng to the .qmail-default file if you are using vpopm
anyone know how to enable spamassassin PER domain.
in an easy way. and how can i use spamassassin without using qmail-scanner and
not need to recompile my qmail install with the qmailqueue patch.,
-Thomas
Carl R. Friend writes:
>For what it's worth, I'm stuck at 2.43 because the newer versions
> are too resource-intensive for my rather modest iron.
There's the problem right there. Those spams are caught with 2.5x
and better with 2.60. :(
Why not try out 2.55 *with bayes disabled* -- that sho
Hi!
I am running RedHat 7.2 with Spamassassin
installed thru RPMs.
I have also integrated the exiscan-patch into Exim.
Can I change the path of the user_prefs files in a cfg-file?
The default of the file is the home-drectory of the
user. I want to use the /home/mail/$user dir .
Cheers
At 08:04 PM 8/14/2003 +0200, Hub Dohnmen wrote:
I am running RedHat 7.2 with Spamassassin installed thru RPMs.
I have also integrated the exiscan-patch into Exim.
Can I change the path of the user_prefs files in a cfg-file?
The default of the file is the home-drectory of the user. I want to use
t
Is there a way to include the rejected mails in the
header? example. When I get a rejected/spam it lists the
following:
Content
analysis details: (17.00 points, 5
required)FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS (0.7 points) From: ends in
numbersHTML_WEB_BUGS (0.9 points) BODY:
Image tag with an I
Greetings.
I'm new to this list, but not to SpamAssassin, and have a query
regarding some of the newer types of spam I'm beginning to see at a
small ISP I donate time to.
Specifically, I'm talking about the kind of spam that shows up as
an HTML link to a HREFed image and *very* little el
Carey Jung writes:
> Could somebody explain to me why the BAYES_80 score for local-with-bayes
> (5th column, 5.300) is higher than the BAYES_90 and BAYES_99 scores? This
> seems counter-intuitive.
This should be a FAQ, if it isn't already.
Basically, the GA looks at the overall success rate --
I'm running SA 2.55. It uses the following Bayes scores out of the box:
score BAYES_00 0 0 -5.300 -5.200
score BAYES_01 0 0 -5.400 -5.400
score BAYES_10 0 0 -5.300 -4.701
score BAYES_20 0 0 -4.701 -2.601
score BAYES_30 0 0 -1.070 -0.927
score BAYES_40 0.0
score BAYES_44 0.0
score BAYES_50 0.0
sco
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler
> At 05:37 PM 8/1/03 -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> >But there is no specific user associated with a mailing list.
> >
> >1. Is this why mail is not going through SA if it's bound for a
> > list?
> >2. Is there a way to make all mail go through
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler
> At 05:37 PM 8/1/03 -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> >But there is no specific user associated with a mailing list.
> >
> >1. Is this why mail is not going through SA if it's bound for a
> > list?
> >2. Is there a way to make all mail go through SA
Take a look at this link from a previous post:
http://www.stearns.org/doc/spamassassin-setup.current.html
--Larry
---
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are ava
At 05:37 PM 8/1/03 -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
But there is no specific user associated with a mailing list.
1. Is this why mail is not going through SA if it's bound for a list?
2. Is there a way to make all mail go through SA?
Procmail is an MDA, thus, it only gets involved if a message is handl
I just noticed that while all *my* mail is getting processed via SA, I
believe that mail being sent to mailinglists on my machine are not.
My /etc/procmailrc says:
DROPPRIVS=yes
:0fw
* < 256000
| spamc
But there is no specific user associated with a mailing list.
1. Is this why mail is
I don't know if that's the case, but if you "--forget" the spam mailbox
first it should be okay.
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 11:58:42AM -0400, Michael W. Cocke wrote:
> The docs seem to say if a message is learned as ham, and then
> re-learned as spam, the 'ham' learning is undone. Am I understandin
The docs seem to say if a message is learned as ham, and then
re-learned as spam, the 'ham' learning is undone. Am I understanding
this properly? And has anyone tested it?
The reason I ask is this (and don't tell me it's a stupid way to do
this - I'm trying to cope with idiots, I mean end-users,
Procmail will do it, but you can also use spamass-milter (if you use
Sendmail) to bounce spam to a catchall address.
--
Thomas Cameron, RHCE, CNE, MCSE, MCT
Cameron Technical Services, Inc.
http://www.camerontech.com
(512) 454-3200
---
This SF
SA is an incredible tool.
Is there a way that once a message is flagged as spam It gets de-queued and moved to a specific folder.
Example
Qmail recives the message it is
then filtered through SA. If the message is marked as “nonspam” it gets delivered as normal.
How ever if the me
Simon Byrnand wrote:
Unlike Razor2, which Spamassassin picks up by itself, you seem to need
to specify a few things in your /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf.
At the minimum you need to tell it the path to the dccproc executable,
thus:
dcc_path /usr/local/bin/dccproc
FWIW, 2.60 picks it up autom
At 22:35 20/07/03 -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
I currently have razor installed for use by SA. I'd like to also add DCC.
Do I have to do anything once I install DCC to make SA know that it's
there? Do I just reinstall SA or is there more? Or do I even have to do
that?
Unlike Razor2, which Spamassas
I currently have razor installed for use by SA. I'd like to also add DCC.
Do I have to do anything once I install DCC to make SA know that it's
there? Do I just reinstall SA or is there more? Or do I even have to do
that?
TIA
--
-Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana. Stranger t
dawnshade wrote:
routers:
# Spam Assassin
spamcheck_router:
no_verify
driver = accept
condition = "${if and { {!def:h_X-Spam-Flag:} {!eq {$received_protocol}{spam-scanned}}}
{1}{0}}"
transport = spamcheck
[...]
In this case: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - not real address. How i can tell to
Spamassa
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 11:44 AM
> To: dawnshade; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] question about returning mail
>
> At 04:44 PM 7/11/2003 +0400, dawnshade wrote:
> >In this ca
At 04:44 PM 7/11/2003 +0400, dawnshade wrote:
In this case: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - not real address. How i can tell to
Spamassassin don't doing this
It's not spamassassin that's doing it, spamassassin itself can't even try
to do this. Exim however can do things like this, and it's Exim that needs
Hello all,
Spamassassin2.55+exim4.20:
transports:
# Spam Assassin
spamcheck:
driver = pipe
command = /usr/local/bin/exim -oMr spam-scanned -bS
use_bsmtp = true
transport_filter = /usr/local/bin/spamc
home_directory = "/tmp"
current_directory = "/tmp"
# must use a pr
At 03:42 PM 6/27/2003 -0700, Marvin Raab wrote:
I'm running SA 2.51 on Linux 7.3 with perl 5.6.1
I tried
body [EMAIL PROTECTED] /[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
describe [EMAIL PROTECTED] searches for above phrase in body
score [EMAIL PROTECTED] 15.0
The test is never executed.
Also fails to execute:
/[EMA
I'm running SA 2.51 on Linux 7.3 with perl 5.6.1
I'm also relatively new to all of this Linux, SA, and Perl, but have
been running successfully for a few months and have written many simple
tests of my own.
I'm trying to write a test to catch many spam messages which substitute
'@' for the letter
Hi Gary,
>Ok, so the obvious question is how does one then pull the
>message out? I mean, I know I've seen references to using
>forward as an attachment as the way to preserve the headers,
>but I don't think I've seen any indication anywhere on
>exactly how to deal with it from that point to
At 03:35 PM 6/25/2003, you wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 03:06:24PM -0400, Gary Schrock wrote:
> What I thought happens is that sa-learn can recognize an email message
that
> contains a message/rfc822 attached message, and learn from that attached
> message, hence the reason you should forward a
Gary Schrock wrote on Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:06:24 -0400:
> Do I need to be doing something before the message gets piped to
> sa-learn to pull the attachment out so it's seperate?
>
Yes, sa-learn needs the message in the attachment, not the whole thing. That's
why it is in the attachment, so you
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 03:06:24PM -0400, Gary Schrock wrote:
> What I thought happens is that sa-learn can recognize an email message that
> contains a message/rfc822 attached message, and learn from that attached
> message, hence the reason you should forward a spam message to it using
> that
Ok, with recent discussion on the list I've gotten somewhat confused by
this issue.
What I thought happens is that sa-learn can recognize an email message that
contains a message/rfc822 attached message, and learn from that attached
message, hence the reason you should forward a spam message to
oh.. so its still in there, but as a modified, improved, form -- not
completely taken out.
thats what i thought was posted.
On Friday, June 20, 2003, at 03:11 PM, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
Jonathan Vanasco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Any reason for this, or are we to use custom rules for that?
It
Jonathan Vanasco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Any reason for this, or are we to use custom rules for that?
It was changed because the old test needed improvement, not on a whim.
Old HTML_WEB_BUGS rule wasn't a very good discriminator between HTML
spam and HTML ham. In other words, it had about
Any reason for this, or are we to use custom rules for that?
On Thursday, June 19, 2003, at 10:45 PM, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
Jonathan Vanasco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
body Image tag with an ID code to identify you
HTML_WEB_BUGS0.542 0.100 0.100 0.100
does that trap
http://b
1 - 100 of 176 matches
Mail list logo
