Hello Rocky,
Wednesday, January 14, 2004, 8:53:25 PM, you wrote:
RO> I'm writing some custom rules and i am wondering if there is a list
RO> somewhere of what parts of the header i can test? such as
RO> header NO_REAL_NAME From =~
RO> header TO_HAS_SPACESTo:addr =~
First
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Orbital,
Friday, August 22, 2003, 1:32:12 PM, you wrote:
OO> Hello,
OO> I am new to SA and would like to know if catching 160 spam from 8000
OO> mails in a day is normal or not? I suspect this is not normal so any
OO> ideas where i should look
ah, great info, much thanks
the goal would be to be able to "call" custom SA rules per domain
abc.com --> /etc/mail/spamassassin/abc.local.cf
xyz.com --> /etc/mail/spamassassin/xyz.local.cf
and such
On Fri, 2003-08-08 at 09:27, Matt Kettler wrote:
At 01:01 PM 8/8/03 +, william f guyt
At 01:01 PM 8/8/03 +, william f guyton jr wrote:
Is their a configuration that allows SA to use unique local.cf for
each domain passing thru a SA gateway?
This is really a function of the tool that calls SA, and not SA itself. So
you'd have to specify which tool you're using for that.
As an
Hi
> I'm using QMail and yesterday I compiled the latest version of
> SpamAssassin ! How can I configure it to block spam ??
> I have no idea at all !
>
> P.S: do you know a god virus scanner for qmail ??
I would recommend using qmail-scanner and the clam antivirus software,
I've had no problem
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 08:44:06PM -0600, RTS wrote:
> On a generic site wide configuration when SA identifies a piece of
> mail based on required_hits as spam what does it do with it??
The same thing it does when not on a side-wide basis; it marks up the
mail and passes it back. ie:
Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We have a Red hat 7.3 mail server and I am looking for a way to filter
> out SPAM email from our server. We have about 30 email accounts. Can
> SpamAssassin do this?
Yes.
--
Daniel Quinlan Linux, open source, and
http://www.pathname.com/~q
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 03:16:14PM -0500, william f guyton jr wrote:
> this is what I have got:
>
> -rw-r--r--1 root root 291 Oct 15 14:20 local.cf
>
> [root@projects spamassassin]# pwd
>
> /etc/mail/spamassassin
Ok, how about /usr/share/spamassassin which is the default for t
this is what I have got:
-rw-r--r--1 root root 291 Oct 15 14:20 local.cf
[root@projects spamassassin]# pwd
/etc/mail/spamassassin
On Tue, 2002-10-15 at 14:55, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 02:46:38PM -0500, william f guyton jr wrote:
> > I must have a switch
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 02:46:38PM -0500, william f guyton jr wrote:
> I must have a switch set wrong, but I cant seem to find it.
That is a usual symptom of spamassassin not being able to read the
rule files. Check paths and permissions. Were the rules installed in
a default location?
--
Ra
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 11:07:30AM -0400, Don Stafford wrote:
> Do I have to do anything other than install, and then run the spamassassin
> 'start' routine in etc/rc.d/init.d that actually starts spamd?
Do you call spamc from somewhere (procmail, a milter/qmail-scanner/etc)?
--
Randomly Genera
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 09:17:55AM -0400, Don Stafford wrote:
> However, I cannot find a 'log' file to see what is being dumped.
>
> Is there one? How do I know if valid emails are being dumped?
Well, spamassassin doesn't "dump" any emails, it's just a filter. So the
only log you can see is, by
>I already have RBL enabled in my MTA (postfix), and those RBL checks
>don't take anywhere near 30 seconds. Altho I will try setting
>"skip_rbl_checks" to 1 and try the timing again.
Be careful;l that RBL test of SA are not the same as RBL tests of your
MTA. SA does not test on the enveloppe, but
>Something must be wrong with your installation or setup.
>My average time for a scan is ~4 seconds and that's with
>RBL's checks and Razor.
That is forgetting a lot of versatility in network access.
I beleive I access most of the RBL servers through 2 satellite hops,
thats means 1 second RTT. A
Tony Hoyle said:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Michael Leone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: 18 July 2002 16:15
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] newbie question about rule base
>>
>>
>> Hmmm. Well, I can try it again.
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Leone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 18 July 2002 16:15
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] newbie question about rule base
>
>
> Hmmm. Well, I can try it again. What info should I post, to determine
> wheth
Lars Hansson said:
> On Wednesday 17 July 2002 20:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> It *is* faster than spamd, tho - when I was using spamc/spamd, it
>> would take 30+ seconds to scan; amavisd-new does it in like 3 or 4.
>
> Something must be wrong with your installation or setup.
> My average time
On Wednesday 17 July 2002 20:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It *is* faster than spamd, tho - when I was using spamc/spamd, it would
> take 30+ seconds to scan; amavisd-new does it in like 3 or 4.
Something must be wrong with your installation or setup.
My average time for a scan is ~4 seconds and
On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 23:28, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> >It *is* faster than spamd, tho - when I was using spamc/spamd, it would
> >take 30+ seconds to scan; amavisd-new does it in like 3 or 4.
>
> It should be, AFAIR, it disable RBL check that takes some time (if nop
> CPU resources).
I already ha
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> >It *is* faster than spamd, tho - when I was using spamc/spamd, it would
> >take 30+ seconds to scan; amavisd-new does it in like 3 or 4.
>
> It should be, AFAIR, it disable RBL check that takes some time (if nop
> CPU resources).
I'm finding the delay
>It *is* faster than spamd, tho - when I was using spamc/spamd, it would
>take 30+ seconds to scan; amavisd-new does it in like 3 or 4.
It should be, AFAIR, it disable RBL check that takes some time (if nop
CPU resources).
Olivier
---
This sf
The rules are static, and hand made. The "AI" part is done by the
developers to evolve the scores applied to rules, and is done prior to release.
/usr/share/spamassassin is the default location for the standard ruleset.
You can add your own custom rules in /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf for
s
> I'm considering whether to incoporate spamassassin
> into our main mailgateway (which is running amavis as email virus
> scan. The good thing is the new amavis has this spamassassin
> inclusion option) or not.
Well, amavisd-new has it. There are like 4 versions of amavis now -
amavis, amavisd,
At 07/12/2002 15:12, Collins, Elizabeth wrote:
>Howdy,
>
> I am new to SpamAssassin but I recently inherited the company wide spam
>filtering stuff. I have been expirimenting w/ my own rules. I like to
>leave the stock rules files as they are, but I want to change some of the
>rules therein.
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> > I had that happen to me too. I had to manually edit the user's spool file
> > and turn the "rom" into "From" to keep the email clients from gaggingn
> >
> > On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Aaron Falk wrote:
> >
> > > I'm trying to integrate Spamassassin into my
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, William Porquet wrote:
> I had that happen to me too. I had to manually edit the user's spool file
> and turn the "rom" into "From" to keep the email clients from gaggingn
>
> On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Aaron Falk wrote:
>
> > I'm trying to integrate Spamassassin into my RH7.2 sys
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 6:47 PM
|To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Newbie question - script for resubmit and add to
|whitelist
|
|
|In your message regarding RE: [SAtalk] Newbie question -
|script for resubmit
|and add to whitelist dated T
In your message regarding RE: [SAtalk] Newbie question - script for resubmit
and add to whitelist dated Thu, 20 Jun 2002 08:57:33 -0500, Smart, Dan said
that ...
>SD- I copy all message headers as a log to a MBOX mailbox using the Procmail
>SD- :0chi: command. The 'c' comma
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 12:12:46PM -0700, Aaron Falk wrote:
> Actually, I use sendmail so I have no exim.conf. :(
I'm not familar with sendmail, but I'm sure there's something similar.
>
> Through some private correspondance I've been led to believe that there is
> a bug in procmail (even the
>> > > Fetchmail can't get the messages from the IMAP server because now it
>> > > see's a corrupt mailbox. The messages look like this:
>> > >
>> > > rom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 7 00:12:27 2002
>> >
>
> Did you check the FAQ at http://www.spamassassin.org/faq.html ?
>
yep.
>
>
> I wa
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 08:03:44AM -0700, Aaron Falk wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 12:22:47AM -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Aaron Falk wrote:
> >
> > > Fetchmail can't get the messages from the IMAP server because now it
> > > see's a corrupt mailbox. The messages look li
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 12:22:47AM -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Aaron Falk wrote:
>
> > Fetchmail can't get the messages from the IMAP server because now it
> > see's a corrupt mailbox. The messages look like this:
> >
> > rom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 7 00:12:27 2002
>
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Aaron Falk wrote:
> Fetchmail can't get the messages from the IMAP server because now it
> see's a corrupt mailbox. The messages look like this:
>
> rom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 7 00:12:27 2002
Get ftp://ftp.procmail.net/pub/procmail/testing/snapshot.tar.gz and
install
9 1212 512 364 310
- Original Message -
From: "Theo Van Dinter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Nipper, Arnold" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Spamassassin List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 12:37 AM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] newbie &
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 11:03:22PM +0200, Nipper, Arnold wrote:
> dig just times out if no nameserver is given in resolv.conf
Not surprising. No nameserver means no configuration, so what is dig
supposed to do?
But you had a nameserver line in there, and could check for MX using
dig, corre
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 03:06:21AM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> > It does not trigger NO_MX_FOR_FROM for me. Maybe there was some
transient DNS
> > issue?
>
> He was saying that it's triggered on every email even though the from
> has a valid MX found via some DNS tool
t"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] newbie & question on NO_MX_FOR_FROM
>
>
> > > My first thought was to ask what was in his /etc/resolv.conf, but he
> > > said he's running bind 9-something on that machine.
Hi Henry - I have it working now. I'm using a Cobalt Qube 3 (which runs
some Linux variant, RH I believe).
Just needed to setup procmail correctly, and fix up some stuff in smrsh.
It's working great now!
At 02:55 AM 5/3/2002 -0700, Henry Kwan wrote:
> > My .foward is setup exactly as the READM
> My .foward is setup exactly as the README says:
> "|IFS=' ' && exec /usr/bin/procmail -f- || exit 75 #jason"
Hi Jason.
What system are you running? I just installed SA myself and I didn't need a
.forward file since RH's sendmail is setup to run from a .procmailrc file
directly. So I just s
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 06:03:47PM -0700, Jason Hough wrote:
| Just out of curiosity, what does the IFS= part do, and how necessary is it
| here?
man bash
It is the Internal Field Separator list. All characters in that
string are considered delimiters for the individual parts of a string
(used
Just out of curiosity, what does the IFS= part do, and how necessary is it
here?
By the way thanks for the info, Im reading up on smrsh now...
At 07:50 PM 5/2/2002 -0500, dman wrote:
>On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 05:13:03PM -0700, Jason Hough wrote:
>| I'm following the instructions in the README, b
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 05:13:03PM -0700, Jason Hough wrote:
| I'm following the instructions in the README, but when I send a message to
| myself (from another account), it bounces back with this message:
|
|- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
| "|IFS=' ' && exec
> :0fw
> | /usr/local/bin/spamc
A few others have had the same problem. There are a few workarounds. One
of them is to just the following recipe:
:0fw
| /usr/bin/spamassassin -P
Aly S.P Dharshi had the following suggestion:
> For some odd reason I had spamc not working and I finally track
On Tuesday 19 March 2002 02:54 pm, dman wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 02:22:22PM -0800, Byrne Reese wrote:
> | Hopefully, someone can tell me to go read a specific FAQ or something,
> | but I have nothing that will help me get qmail to work with spam
> | assassin.
> |
> | I need spamassassin to
MAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 6:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] newbie question
>
>
> I am trying to get SA to recognize a different mailspool. I thought I
> would do that using the MAIL environment variable.
>
> So my
If so I have scripts for both of those.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rick
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Byrne Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "dman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 6
Message -
From: "Byrne Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "dman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] newbie question
I should clarify. I DON'T want it delivered to /var/spool... sor
I should clarify. I DON'T want it delivered to /var/spool... sorry - a
typo on my part.
There are no clear instructions on what files I need to edit to get it
to work as a filter.
Let me elaborate... my .qmail file once contained only the following:
> ./Maildir/
Indicating that mail for me was
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 02:22:22PM -0800, Byrne Reese wrote:
| Hopefully, someone can tell me to go read a specific FAQ or something,
| but I have nothing that will help me get qmail to work with spam
| assassin.
|
| I need spamassassin to deliver mail to $HOME/Maildir (in a Maildir
| format, not
--On Wednesday, February 20, 2002 17:34 -0500 Greg Ward
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have heard good things about
> postfix.
I haven't played much with exim but I've used postfix a lot and it's real
easy to setup.
-jlh
___
Spamassassin-talk m
On 20 February 2002, Mark Graves said:
> I have a RedHat Linux system that I use for DNS, Listserv, etc and was
> wondering if there was a HOWTO document about creating a store-forward
> mail system. That is, have my Linux system (Sendmail) receive all
> inbound SMTP traffic, parse it against Spa
51 matches
Mail list logo
