RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2004-01-05 Thread Evan Platt
--On Monday, January 05, 2004 8:55 AM -0500 Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Perhaps a good first step would be to not use an open relay for your mail And second to put a subject line on your messages. :) --- This SF.net email is sponsored b

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2004-01-05 Thread Bill
> Can Anybody tell me how to configure spamassassin on redhat > 8.0/ sendmail > > With Regards, > Sarvesh Singhal > > Abhikalak Consultants > (Systems and Security Division) > B-326, Sarita Vihar, > New Delhi - 110 044 > Ph: +91 11 2695 2234-35 > web:www.abhikalak.com Perhaps a good first step

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-12-09 Thread ckm99b+sa
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, David B Funk wrote: > On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > We've got SA 2.60 running on a Solaris 8 box with SunONE Messaging > > Server. It is doing spam scanning for all our users (~7000). In > > order to keep the system as speedy as possible, I've configured t

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-12-08 Thread David B Funk
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > We've got SA 2.60 running on a Solaris 8 box with SunONE Messaging > Server. It is doing spam scanning for all our users (~7000). In > order to keep the system as speedy as possible, I've configured the > bayes journal to sit on /tmp which is a memor

Re: bayes database backup [was: Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)]

2003-12-08 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 01:58:47PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > So rather than backing up all three files, I just need to back up the > bayes_toks file periodicly. And I could use a file lock for this > purpose, as you confirmed below. Arguably you should backup seen as well, it has the mess

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-12-08 Thread Justin Mason
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Theo Van Dinter writes: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 01:11:06PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I'd like to back up the journal periodicly to disk. Right now I have > > There's really no point to that. Just sync the journal to the DB. > > > searc

bayes database backup [was: Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)]

2003-12-08 Thread ckm99b+sa
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Theo Van Dinter wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 01:11:06PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I'd like to back up the journal periodicly to disk. Right now I have > > There's really no point to that. Just sync the journal to the DB. Ok, then I guess I have a faulty underst

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-12-08 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 01:11:06PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'd like to back up the journal periodicly to disk. Right now I have There's really no point to that. Just sync the journal to the DB. > searching through the archives and docs, I've not found anything > regarding this issue.

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-12-04 Thread Stenglein, James C
>>I just got this virus message that appears to have come from sourceforge. >>Did anyone else get this or did my antivirus FP on me? >FP.. that exact message passed through my copy of clamscan just fine.. >clamav is updated hourly here. We had it hit as a virus also... James -

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-12-03 Thread Matt Kettler
At 04:41 PM 12/3/2003, Bill wrote: I just got this virus message that appears to have come from sourceforge. Did anyone else get this or did my antivirus FP on me? FP.. that exact message passed through my copy of clamscan just fine.. clamav is updated hourly here. -

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-11-25 Thread Christopher X. Candreva
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, mairhtin o'feannag wrote: > I have one client who wants to receive any emails they get, irrespective > of SPAM (they suspect that there are legitimate emails being eliminated as > spam). What they want is that anything that is addressed to them > (yadayada.com) be sent throug

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-11-22 Thread Ryan Moore
the autolearn header is only set to "yes" when a message is found outside of the boundaries, which is (below) 0.1 for ham/non-spam and (above) 12.0 for spam. It uses scoresets with bayes disabled when comparing an email's score against the thresholds (unless of course you've modified the bayes_*

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-11-22 Thread William Stearns
Good evening, Mairhtin, On Sat, 22 Nov 2003, Mairhtin O'Feannag wrote: > Below are the first few lines of my local.cf file for the entire site. > I do not have a local.cf for any of my users. > > However, when I get mail, it says : autolearn=no version=2.60 > > Why does it think that autolea

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-11-19 Thread Matt Kettler
At 03:25 PM 11/19/2003, Robert Oslin wrote: My first post to this list. Hope I'm doing this right... I received a message with invisible fonts, yet the generic HTML_FONT_INVISIBLE rule wasn't hit. Was it because the body tag didn't specify a background font, therefore the text font color had nothi

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-11-19 Thread Larry Gilson
just as 'white'. > > -id You will need to note that the rawbody line needs to be one line without any line breaks. So the test portion would look like: //i --Larry > -Original Message- > From: Robert Oslin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 19,

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-11-19 Thread Chris Santerre
D]>; > > hits on opelrbl.org like a raped ape!! > > So I would say to you kind sir Reo, SATALK will never leave! :D > > --Chris > > > -Original Message- > > From: Michael H. Collins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 19,

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-11-19 Thread Chris Santerre
never leave! :D --Chris > -Original Message- > From: Michael H. Collins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 1:43 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] (no subject) > > > No, You leave... > > Is this spam o

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-11-19 Thread Robert Oslin
3 12:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SAtalk] (no subject) No, You leave... Is this spam of some new form? Reo wrote: > leave -- Michael H. Collins Admiral, Penguinista Navy It's us against them. Ride like you stole it! http://linuxlink.com -

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-11-19 Thread Michael H. Collins
No, You leave... Is this spam of some new form? Reo wrote: leave -- Michael H. Collins Admiral, Penguinista Navy It's us against them. Ride like you stole it! http://linuxlink.com --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Progr

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-08-21 Thread Hannu Liljemark
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 08:04:00PM +0300, Jchen22 wrote: > does anyone know spam sender "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"? There's little point in looking at the From: header to figure out who's sending the spam. Most of the addresses are almost as random as the addresses in the To: (well, or envelope recipien

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-08-21 Thread Alan Leghart
--On Wednesday, August 20, 2003 12:11 PM -0700 Evan Platt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --On Wednesday, August 20, 2003 1:04 PM -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: does anyone know spam sender "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"? Yeah, my buddy Jim! What's he doing sending out spam?? Care to expand some more on this

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-08-20 Thread Evan Platt
--On Wednesday, August 20, 2003 1:04 PM -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > does anyone know spam sender "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"? Yeah, my buddy Jim! What's he doing sending out spam?? Care to expand some more on this? Anonymizer is a well known software app that allows you to browse without other si

Re: [SAtalk] No subject?

2003-08-01 Thread Yorkshire Dave
On Sat, 2003-08-02 at 03:30, Jim Knuth wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Robert Menschel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Jim Knuth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "SA List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 4

Re: [SAtalk] No subject?

2003-08-01 Thread Jim Knuth
- Original Message - From: "Robert Menschel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jim Knuth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "SA List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 4:06 AM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] No subject? > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED ME

Re: [SAtalk] No subject?

2003-08-01 Thread Robert Menschel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Jim, Friday, August 1, 2003, 3:52:09 PM, you wrote: JK> Hi, JK> how can I make a rule against: JK> "No subject" What do you mean by "No subject"? Do you mean exactly that text in the subject header? Do you mean an email that has no subject h

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject) - Installation

2003-07-31 Thread Matt Kettler
At 12:05 PM 7/31/03 +0530, jagan wrote: sir, i ahve downloaded ur spamassasin . i need to insatll to my server which runs on linux. I like to have the method of 1.INSTALLATION AND 2.INTEGRATING THIS WITH MY MTA QMAIL USING spamd . That is via C AND NOT PERL. so how could i go about installing.

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-07-17 Thread Matt Kettler
At 01:47 PM 7/17/2003 -0600, Eric wrote: when I try to install digest-sha1 I am getting errors. What is the best way to install digest::sha1 from cpan it hangs on ftp If CPAN's ftp is hanging, you probably need passive mode to get through a firewall.. one site with a bit of reference on how to d

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-07 Thread Gerald Raynor
Per the sendmail doc it's [EMAIL PROTECTED], although for kicks I tried what you suggested and got the error: 51 4.0.0 /etc/mail/sendmail.cf: line 1257: Xspamassassin: unknown socket type localhost: Protocol not supported --- Patrick Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "S=unix:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-07 Thread Patrick Morris
"S=unix:[EMAIL PROTECTED]" doesn't really make much sense for a socket name. You probably want "S=localhost:12000" Gerald Raynor wrote: I seem to have everything configured properly but I think I'm missing a small step somewhere in starting/running spamassassin. The process seems to be running b

Re: Enough with the conspiracy theories! (was Re: [SAtalk] (no subject))

2003-06-06 Thread Jonathan Nichols
It would help if the spam report that's generated clearly identified the host that added it. If that header included something like: Scanned for spam by host mail.small-web-host.com (172.17.2.3) I also *LOVE* that idea, but for another reason. I like to know which machines in the farm scanned

Re: Enough with the conspiracy theories! (was Re: [SAtalk] (no subject))

2003-06-06 Thread Martin Radford
At Wed Jun 4 21:10:01 2003, Justin Mason wrote: > - They go to the URL in the mail -- http://SpamAssassin.org/tag/ -- > this page tells them to ask their ISP. So they do, and the ISP > says "we don't run that" -- because the *web host*, not the ISP, > is running it, and they don't

Re: Enough with the conspiracy theories! (was Re: [SAtalk] (no subject))

2003-06-06 Thread Jim Ford
On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 01:51:43AM -0700, Alan Leghart wrote: > YMMV. Hopefully your changes will relieve some of the "I'm the president" > posts. As we seem to have established the OP as a spammer/troll, should we report them to Razor et al as well as our Bayes DB's? Regards: Jim Ford -

Re: Enough with the conspiracy theories! (was Re: [SAtalk] (no subject))

2003-06-06 Thread Justin Mason
Alan Leghart said: > --On Wednesday, June 4, 2003 1:10 PM -0700 Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Listen folks -- you are all too conspiracy-minded here. > > > > > The last few people who've mailed here, have fit this profile. I know, > > because I've followed up on it. > > > >

RE: Enough with the conspiracy theories! (was Re: [SAtalk] (no subject))

2003-06-06 Thread Chris Santerre
the way to mexico! :) > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 4:10 PM > To: 'Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail)' > Subject: Enough with the conspiracy theories! (was Re: [SAtalk] (no > subject)) > > &g

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread alan premselaar
On 6/4/03 2:07 PM, "Matt Beland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (B (B[...] (B> (B> Does anyone else think this is an odd series of coincidences? Or have I (B> watched too many conspiracy movies lately? (B (Bi've always been suspicious of these emails... which is why i don't reply (B(flame or o

Enough with the conspiracy theories! (was Re: [SAtalk] (no subject))

2003-06-05 Thread Justin Mason
Peter P. Benac said: > Ya'll need to realize that this crap is coming from the very people Spam > Assassin was designed to block - THE SPAMMER. > Think people Spam Assassin doesn't just appear on a PC. It needs to be > installed. Perl needs to be installed, a Mail Transfer Agent needs to be > In

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread Jonathan Nichols
Troll is too good a word for these people, we need some new jargon to refer to a trolling spammer, suggestions? "lawyer?" ;) --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best thread debugger on the planet. Designed

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread Stuart Gall
- Original Message - From: "Matt Beland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 8:07 AM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] (no subject) > On Tuesday 03 June 2003 08:40 pm, Ryan Bingham wrote: > > Didn't this (and all the s

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread Patrick Bores
Well, with all the great material gathered so far, we could just start semi-randomly auto-generating these response threads and stick them in the list whenever an e-mail like Marge's comes in. Then we could waste everyone's time without wasting everyone's time. ;-) Patrick On Tuesday, June 3,

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread Thomas Cameron
Interestingly enough, as a test I sent an e-mail to "Marge Golomb" with a read receipt request. I got the receipt, and it appears whoever "marge" is is using OE6. TC --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread Peter P. Benac
tp://www.nmsusers.org To have principles... First have courage.. With principles comes integrity!!! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thomas Cameron Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 10:42 To: Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail) Subject:

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread AltGrendel
On Wed, 2003-06-04 at 09:52, Chris Santerre wrote: > I plan on never replying to these kinds of posts again. It is a scam to > waste our time. Hell, I may start writing a rule to put them in the spamtrap > ;) > Ah, Grasshopper. You have acheved true enlightenment. -- AltGrendel <[EMAIL PROTEC

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread Thomas Cameron
- Original Message - On Tuesday 03 June 2003 08:40 pm, Ryan Bingham wrote: >Or have I watched too many conspiracy movies lately? No, I think you're right on track - I was just talking to Elvis about this kind of thing the other day on the Mother Ship. -- Thomas Cameron, RHCE, CNE, MCSE

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread Thomas Cameron
- Original Message - From: "Chris Santerre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 8:49 AM Subject: RE: [SAtalk] (no subject) > UNtil you figure out how to send it to the correct a

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread Chris Santerre
Received: from marge (ppp025.pfa.centurytel.net [207.230.201.227]) by r2d2.centurytel.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id h541GkPB015914 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 "from marge" Hm.. "ppp025" Hmmm. Me thinks if we contacted centurytel.net they would

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-05 Thread Chris Santerre
4, 2003 3:19 AM > To: Jack Gostl; Matt Beland > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] (no subject) > > > how many times should i say unsubscribe me from this list > > - Original Message - > From: "Jack Gostl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> &

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-04 Thread Ralf Guenthner
Why don't you simply send an e-mail to the correct address?? - Original Message - From: "Frank Chibesakunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jack Gostl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Matt Beland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-04 Thread Frank Chibesakunda
how many times should i say unsubscribe me from this list - Original Message - From: "Jack Gostl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Matt Beland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 8:47 AM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] (no subjec

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-04 Thread Reijo Pitkanen
iots... :P PS: Standard, not-trolling/not-flaming disclamer here. -r - Original Message - From: "Matt Beland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 10:07 PM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] (no subject) > On Tuesday 03 June 2003 08:40

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-04 Thread Jack Gostl
On Tue, 3 Jun 2003, Matt Beland wrote: > On Tuesday 03 June 2003 08:40 pm, Ryan Bingham wrote: > > Didn't this (and all the subsequent flames) just happen? Like several > > times already in the recent past?? > > > > Anyone ever see Groundhog Day? I'm startin to get wigged out... > > Yeah, but t

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-04 Thread Matt Beland
On Tuesday 03 June 2003 08:40 pm, Ryan Bingham wrote: > Didn't this (and all the subsequent flames) just happen? Like several > times already in the recent past?? > > Anyone ever see Groundhog Day? I'm startin to get wigged out... Yeah, but these guys aren't as funny as Bill Murray. One other t

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-04 Thread Ryan Bingham
Didn't this (and all the subsequent flames) just happen? Like several times already in the recent past?? Anyone ever see Groundhog Day? I'm startin to get wigged out... Ryan - Original Message - From: Marge Golomb To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:17 PM Subject: [SA

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-04 Thread Bob
Hi, Let's break this up into smaller pieces... On Tue, 3 Jun 2003 20:17:21 -0500 "Marge Golomb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I do not want spamassassin - I called my ISP and they do not subscribe > to you. I emailed them and they know nothing about you. To be fair, we know nothing about you or

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-04 Thread Robin Lynn Frank
On Tuesday 03 June 2003 18:17, Marge Golomb wrote: > I do not want spamassassin - I called my ISP and they do not subscribe to > you. I emailed them and they know nothing about you. I found you on my > computer, deleted you, and 3 days later you are back again. I want you off > my computer - if

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Jack Gostl
> >> As far as I know this is an open list that allows non-subscribers to > >> post > >> to it. BIG MISTAKE for a list of this nature IMHO. If the list were made > >> "subscriber posting only" then a number of things would happen: > > > > If you think this is a hassle, have some sympathy for the l

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Simon Byrnand
> >> As far as I know this is an open list that allows non-subscribers to >> post >> to it. BIG MISTAKE for a list of this nature IMHO. If the list were made >> "subscriber posting only" then a number of things would happen: > > If you think this is a hassle, have some sympathy for the list manager

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Jack Gostl
> As far as I know this is an open list that allows non-subscribers to post > to it. BIG MISTAKE for a list of this nature IMHO. If the list were made > "subscriber posting only" then a number of things would happen: If you think this is a hassle, have some sympathy for the list manager who has t

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Per Björklund
Or, if people exclude this list when replying to anyone who for whatever reason send a complaint about spamassassin disrupting service or whatever... I don't see any reason for anyone to include the list in a reply?... / Per -Original Message- From: Simon Byrnand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTE

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Thomas Cameron
-3200 Main http://www.camerontech.com - Original Message - From: "Simon Byrnand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Thomas Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Keoki Kalune" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, May 31

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-06-01 Thread Simon Byrnand
> Hi Keoki - > > You should probably talk to your system administrator or your ISP, > whomever > handles your e-mail service. The mailing list you sent your message to is > for people who use and develop SpamAssassin. There is little chance that > anyone on this list has anything to do with your

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread Jonathan Nichols
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 30 May 2003, Chris Santerre wrote: Has anyone gotten a reply from these kinds of posts after you answer them. I think the score is like 1-6. 1 reply after we all answered, and we've had about 6 of these kinds of posts. Didn't anyone call the person? I am s t

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread listuser
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Chris Santerre wrote: > Has anyone gotten a reply from these kinds of posts after you answer them. I > think the score is like 1-6. 1 reply after we all answered, and we've had > about 6 of these kinds of posts. > > Didn't anyone call the person? I am s tempted :) Make

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread William Stearns
Good afternoon, Mr. Kalune, all, On Fri, 30 May 2003, Chris Santerre wrote: > Didn't anyone call the person? I did. I Left a message on his voicemail saying, essentially, "contact your admin group or the ISP in question to get spamassassin tuned; the group of developers you've contact

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread Evan Platt
At 08:59 AM 05/30/2003, you wrote: Content analysis details: (5.80 points, 5 required) MSGID_CHARS_SPAM (0.2 points) Message-Id has characters indicating spam HTML_FONT_FACE_ODD (0.1 points) BODY: HTML font face is not a commonly used face HTML_80_90 (0.5 points) BODY: Message is 80

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread Chris Santerre
K. West [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 1:11 PM > To: 'Keoki Kalune'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [SAtalk] (no subject) > > > Ok you need to contact your ISP you twit! They are the ones that use > spamassassin to filter your email... S

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread Marek Dohojda
Well he does want someone to contact him ASAP, should we all just send e-mail to him? On side note, sure gets agitated poor lil' fellow. -Original Message- From: Frank Pineau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 10:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, 30 May 2003, K

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread listuser
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Keoki Kalune wrote: > TAKE ME OFF THIS SITE, KNOW ONE KNOW WHO OR HOW I GOT THIS BUT IT IS > DISRUPTING BY BUSINESS. I WANT SOME ONE TO CONTACT ME ASAP *sigh* > Executive Vice President Typical management. The tie is just a little too tight. J

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread Frank Pineau
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Keoki Kalune wrote: > TAKE ME OFF THIS SITE, KNOW ONE KNOW WHO OR HOW I GOT THIS BUT IT IS > DISRUPTING BY BUSINESS. I WANT SOME ONE TO CONTACT ME ASAP > > Keoki Kalune > Executive Vice President Nice. Executive VP and (s)he can't even form a coherent sentence. I won't

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread Jonathan Nichols
Keoki Kalune wrote: *TAKE ME OFF THIS SITE, KNOW ONE KNOW WHO OR HOW I GOT THIS BUT IT IS DISRUPTING BY BUSINESS. I WANT SOME ONE TO CONTACT ME ASAP* www.rkgllc.com Uh oh... sonic.net sounds familiar. ;) [10:[EMAIL PROTECTED] host -t mx rkgllc.com rkgllc.com. mail is ha

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread Brian K. West
Ok you need to contact your ISP you twit! They are the ones that use spamassassin to filter your email... So contact them bkw -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keoki Kalune Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 11:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-05-31 Thread Thomas Cameron
Hi Keoki - You should probably talk to your system administrator or your ISP, whomever handles your e-mail service. The mailing list you sent your message to is for people who use and develop SpamAssassin. There is little chance that anyone on this list has anything to do with your e-mail servic

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2003-03-10 Thread Alexander Litvinov
On Вторник, 11 Март 2003 12:40, Mieko Miyazaki wrote: > Do not Send!! I hate What don't you want to recieve ? :-) --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf __

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-11-04 Thread Matt Kettler
Got any statistics to show it's got a good S/O? I know several spammers forge eudora headers, so I don't know for sure that such a rule would wind up scoring negative when evaluated. It might have even been a rule at one point and got dropped when they pruned all the nonspam rules with S/O over

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-10-20 Thread John Johnson
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Motor Safety Group wrote: > Sub : ROAD ACCIDENTS REDUCTION > Dear Sir /Madam, OMG = looks like the ultimate compliment to SA! The spammers have infiltrated the list. --- This sf.net email is sponsored by: Access Your

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-10-14 Thread Justin Mason
"spamassasin" said: > X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC (2.7 points) RBL: DNSBL: sender is Confirmed Spam Source > > Why only 2.7 points and not something higher to delete mails that are known > spam? Because the blacklist that produces this (Osiru I think) is coming up with a large # of false positives. G

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-10-13 Thread Bob Proulx
spamassasin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-13 19:43:36 +0300]: > X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC (2.7 points) RBL: DNSBL: sender is Confirmed Spam Source > > Why only 2.7 points and not something higher to delete mails that are known > spam? The sender may be a confirmed source of spam. It may be an open rel

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-10-11 Thread Jason Kohles
On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 14:07, spamassasin wrote: > Is something wrong with the following setup ? If razors detects a spam then > mail is being deleted, that's ok. But if it's not detected by razor and is > marked as spam by spamassassin then it doesn't copy the mail to > /var/spool/razor/spam. > >

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-10-11 Thread Steve Thomas
I think you need an asterisk at the beginning of the line: ^SPAM: RAZOR2_CHECK so it'd be: * ^SPAM: RAZOR2_CHECK St- | -Original Message- | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf | Of spamassasin | Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 11:08 AM | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-10-10 Thread Mike Burger
The same way you subscribed. Go to the link at the very bottom of the messages that travel through the list, and follow the subscription management directions. On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, viviane.correge wrote: > How can I unsubscribe ? > > Viviane Correge > Centre InterUniversitaire de Calcul de T

RE: [SAtalk] (No Subject) is there a user-admin for SA with postfix

2002-09-18 Thread Stewart, John
http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > -Original Message- > From: dogface [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 4:49 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SAtalk] (No Subject) is there a user-admin for SA > with postfix > > > i just thought i'

Re: [SAtalk] (No Subject) is there a user-admin for SA with postfix

2002-09-18 Thread Daniel Quinlan
Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Option 5. Post a rude message postulating that the SA developers have > "an issue" with postfix and are unhelpful. Add further > encouragement by repeatedly asking the same question and see > how developers respond to thr

Re: [SAtalk] (No Subject) is there a user-admin for SA with postfix

2002-09-17 Thread Gerry Doris
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 05:58:11PM -0500, dogface wrote: > > from what i have read on this list > > i would of expected nothing less than > > the response i got from you. > > I'm confused. This mailing list is generally quite informative. > > > A. af

Re: [SAtalk] (No Subject) is there a user-admin for SA with postfix

2002-09-17 Thread Duncan Findlay
On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 05:58:11PM -0500, dogface wrote: > from what i have read on this list > i would of expected nothing less than > the response i got from you. I'm confused. This mailing list is generally quite informative. > A. after 3 posts maybe someone could have said > that there are n

Re: [SAtalk] (No Subject) is there a user-admin for SA with postfix

2002-09-17 Thread dogface
inute is another chance to turn it all around - Original Message - From: "Daniel Quinlan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "dogface" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:29 PM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] (No Subject) is there

Re: [SAtalk] (No Subject) is there a user-admin for SA with postfix

2002-09-17 Thread Daniel Quinlan
"dogface" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > i just thought i'd waste more bandwidth with yet another unanswered > post. this will be the 4th time i have posted this question. i > expect it will be the 4th time i do not get any kind of a response. > i gather that SA people have an issue with postfix.

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-06-13 Thread Sidney Markowitz
Doug Crompton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well I got my first XXX that made it through SA today. [...] > Subject: (Adult) Eatme, Juicy ripe P*ssy for you. I got that too. It slipped right through the distribution SA but I checked it using the latest CVS SA and that tagged it right off with a sco

RE: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-05-01 Thread Michael Moncur
Bart Schaefer wrote: > The first problem you may have with this is that not all MUAs allow the > user to "resend" the message (pine calls it "bounce" the message) in its > original form. Outlook, for example (or at least the version we have > installed), will only let you forward it as part of t

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-05-01 Thread Bart Schaefer
This would be more appropriate on the procmail list, but: On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Jeff Shepherd wrote: > I'm setting up an account on my mail server that will unassassinate > false-positive spam. I plan to have users that received mail tagged > as spam send the message to this account The first

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-04-30 Thread Sidney Markowitz
"Jeff Shepherd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked: > Also, I need to add something to the header that will make > SpamAssassin will recognize it as not spam. > Any recommended way? You would not want SpamAssassin to default to anything that spammers could put in spam to get it to pass. But there should b

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-01-24 Thread Dallas Engelken
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > > there are several domain in 60_whitelist by default in 2.1. why would it > > not be checked by spamd? > > works for me (tm) ;) Are you sure your config files are sane and > installed? > > --j. This Works: echo "From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" | spamc This Doesnt Work:

Re: [SAtalk] (no subject)

2002-01-24 Thread Justin Mason
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > there are several domain in 60_whitelist by default in 2.1. why would it > not be checked by spamd? works for me (tm) ;) Are you sure your config files are sane and installed? --j. ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMA