On 31 Jan 2002 at 11:53, Charlie Watts wrote:
> Having ways to integrate SA and an MTA is great.
>
> You can set the benchmark for rejection wherever you are comfortable. But
> you need an MTA that has Perl hooks to be able to integrate SA into the
> SMTP session.
>
> Or milter, I suppose. And
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Nels Lindquist wrote:
> On 31 Jan 2002 at 1:39, Charlie Watts wrote:
>
> > Messages are already tagged with numbers indicating spammishness. Is
> > adding "Maybe" and "Probably" just helpful because it makes filtering
> > easier? It really isn't adding any information.
> >
> >
What I would suggest if you're planning on doing this is to get the SA
report and insert that into the NDR, with suitable customization of the
"report" lines in 10_misc.cf so that legitimate mail can easily be "fixed"
by the sender and re-sent. I'd say, as you point out, that it is in fact no
wor
On 31 Jan 2002 at 1:39, Charlie Watts wrote:
> Messages are already tagged with numbers indicating spammishness. Is
> adding "Maybe" and "Probably" just helpful because it makes filtering
> easier? It really isn't adding any information.
>
> I find that a decent bit of my spam is in the 5-10 ran
On Thu, 2002-01-31 at 00:39, Charlie Watts wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Craig Hughes wrote:
> I like the idea of the multi-level thing, but instead of "filing" the
> message in folders (making SA an MDA?) I think it'd be better implemented by
> sticking alternate tags in the X-
On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Craig Hughes wrote:
> I like the idea of the multi-level thing, but instead of "filing" the
> message in folders (making SA an MDA?) I think it'd be better implemented by
> sticking alternate tags in the X-Spam-Status header such as:
>
> 0-5: X-Spam-Status: No
> 5-15: X-Sp
I like the idea of the multi-level thing, but instead of "filing" the
message in folders (making SA an MDA?) I think it'd be better implemented by
sticking alternate tags in the X-Spam-Status header such as:
0-5: X-Spam-Status: No
5-15: X-Spam-Status: Yes, Maybe
15-30: X-Spam-Status: Yes, Prob
"CertaintyTech - Ed Henderson" said:
> Perhaps devise a method for deleting really Spammy messages - say greater
> than 15. All of the false positives that I have seen are 10 and under.
> Keep ones that are under 15 which makes it easier for scanning for legit
> messages. What do ya think?
ye
> Duncan Findlay said:
>
> > > I was looking to how I could just delete mail that is flagged
> for/as SPAM
> > > rather than leaving it in the users, inbox. I run a small
> domain here,
> > > and the users agree that spam assassin is great, and they have enough
> > > confidence in it that it woul
Duncan Findlay said:
> > I was looking to how I could just delete mail that is flagged for/as SPAM
> > rather than leaving it in the users, inbox. I run a small domain here,
> > and the users agree that spam assassin is great, and they have enough
> > confidence in it that it would just be safe
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 07:12:17PM -0800, Craig Hughes wrote:
> We really need to stop people using lockfiles for spamc rules in
> procmail -- anyone know where people are copying that example from so I
> can fix the docs?
>
How 'bout removing the EXITCODE stuff? That leads to bouces. Without
We really need to stop people using lockfiles for spamc rules in procmail -- anyone know where people are copying that example from so I can fix the docs?
C
On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 17:55, B. Cook wrote:
On 28 Jan 2002 20:45 EST you wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 08:28:41PM -0500, B.
On 28 Jan 2002 20:45 EST you wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 08:28:41PM -0500, B. Cook wrote:
> > How would I go about this, I'm running spamd / spamc and using a global procmailrc
>on FreeBSD -stable.
>
> send it to /dev/null, modify the trap rule to something like:
>
> :0:
> * ^Subjec
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 08:28:41PM -0500, B. Cook wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was looking to how I could just delete mail that is flagged for/as SPAM
> rather than leaving it in the users, inbox. I run a small domain here,
> and the users agree that spam assassin is great, and they have enough
> confi
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 08:28:41PM -0500, B. Cook wrote:
> How would I go about this, I'm running spamd / spamc and using a global procmailrc
>on FreeBSD -stable.
send it to /dev/null, modify the trap rule to something like:
:0:
* ^Subject:.*\*\*\*\*SPAM\*\*\*\*
/dev/null
--
[E
15 matches
Mail list logo
