Just FYI, the CVS-version config file option spam_level_stars will be
useful for this purpose too, for the less procmail proficient.
C
On Wed, 2002-03-27 at 23:18, Michael Moncur wrote:
> leading zero. This way everything has a 2-digit score, so now I can truly sort
> by SpamAssassin score in Ou
> You can basically do a limited CVS checkout of just the rules and
> EvalTests today if you want -- cvs is very flexible that way. Or you
> could checkout the whole thing, and then only install the rules and
> EvalTests files.
> > That might be worth it... a CVS update with a script that allowe
Maybe we could leave the default as SPAM and then in the docs
somewhere hidden say:
SPAM really means might be spam. Do not sue.
C
PS People have way too much time on their hands to spend so much of it
wondering about whether someone maybe might sue, and if they did,
whether they'
*/1 * * * * cd ~/code/spamassassin;cvs commit -m 'Round the clock'
;)
C
On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 02:24, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Olivier Nicole wrote:
> >>In many ways, yes. They have a round-the-clock team watching honeypots
> >>for new outbreaks and updating rules accordingly. SA is much more
>
Well, one issue is that rules are sometimes evals, with corresponding
updates to Mail::Spamassassin::EvalTests
You can basically do a limited CVS checkout of just the rules and
EvalTests today if you want -- cvs is very flexible that way. Or you
could checkout the whole thing, and then only inst
Update from Silicon Valley: I've seen a couple products in the last few
days that send out emails as part of an enterprise software system where
they contain an IFRAME to embed a dynamically updating web page inside
an email. The idea is you send out an email which then provides a
container for t
On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 07:27, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> I'm *so* glad it's a 4 day weekend!
Dammit, I need to move back to the UK
C
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 14:35, Shayne Hardesty wrote:
> this earlier this week.. As spamassassin evolves, rules will need to be
> updated regularly (weekly?), but I think forcing a recompile and reinstall
This shouldn't be the case, if the rules are thoughtfully produced to
start with. I'm runnin
On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 08:08, Charlie Watts wrote:
> I'm curious if most SA users are using Subject: rewriting or not.
It's the default. People are lazy. I bet it's not just the majority,
but the *vast* majority.
C
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
Awesome, thanks Olivier. I'll add it to CVS.
C
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
I'm guessing you need to use some kind of deliver program to get the
mail to the right place -- what IMAP server is that? It seems to not be
expecting the user's mail spool to change without knowing about it,
which seems like a weird thing to do in a mail server, but as I said, it
probably wants
Also, SA has absolutely nothing to do with this. It just happens to be
some people who use SA discussing how to do it. It's not part of SA,
and won't be.
C
On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 20:20, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 08:57:12PM -0700, Michael Moncur wrote:
> > If anyone's worr
That's not HTTP. You meant:
$ echo -e 'GET /path/to/script.cgi HTTP/1.0\r\n\r\n' | netcat
www.example.com 80
or
$ echo -e 'GET /path/to/script.cgi HTTP/1.1\r\nHost:
www.example.com\r\n\r\n' | netcat www.example.com 80
Of course wget or curl is a lot easier. For posting something, you can
us
mail60: netcat
netcat: Command not found.
mail61:
so what next?
Telnet works pretty well for the purpose of simulating TCP protocols
by hand. So in that case, that was simulating HTTP protocol.
Olivier
> That's not HTTP. You meant:
>
> $ echo -e 'GET /path/to/script.cgi HTTP/1.0\r\n\r\n' |
I'm using the standard IMAP server that comes with Red Hat LInux 7.1.
I thought procmail was a mail delivery program???
BTW. I have a .procmailrc in my user's home dir that filters mail to subfolders
and works no problem -- only when I have that global procmailrc file activated
does mail fail
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 05:09:00PM +0700, Olivier Nicole wrote:
| mail60: netcat
| netcat: Command not found.
| mail61:
|
| so what next?
root@dman # apt-get install netcat #
| Telnet works pretty well for the purpose of simulating TCP protocols
| by hand.
Right, but
| So in that case, tha
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 08:49:23PM -0800, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
| "dman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
| > So I'm trying to exploit the script to make the site blacklist
| > itself at dsbl.org. I found a form on the site with the action
| > as "/cgi-bin/formmail.cgi".
|
| It's easy enough to find
I am running spamd on my redhat 6 box and spamd is taking up 5.3% memory.
IS this normal?
root 3401 0.0 5.3 7848 6792 ?S08:44 0:00 perl
/usr/bin/spamd -d -c -a
Thanks.
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https:/
Percentage is relative but on my box spamd is currently using 8.8MB of RAM.
Got this from top.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of AHA
> Lists
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 9:43 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Spamd and
My % = 6.8 megs. That just seems really high while sitting there doing
nothing but waiting.
on 3/29/02 8:50 AM, CertaintyTech - Ed Henderson at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Percentage is relative but on my box spamd is currently using 8.8MB of RAM.
> Got this from top.
>
>
>>
>>
>> I am runn
I've got SpamAssassin working pretty well with MailScanner and Vipul's
Razor, but I can't get any reports to appear in spam. All I get in the
header is:
X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: SpamAssassin (22 hits)
This is the contents of my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
required_hits 7
use_terse_rep
Hi,
I'm working on using SpamAssassin within a perl mail processing script.
In order to reduce overheads, I'm not loading the mail being processed
into a variable and load new instances of Mail::SpamAssassin every time,
but instead am running spamd and getting the script to check the mails
agains
> I've got SpamAssassin working pretty well with MailScanner and Vipul's
> Razor, but I can't get any reports to appear in spam. All I get in the
> header is:
> [snip]
>
> But this gave me nothing. So I added:
> report_header 1
>
are you running SpamAssassin 2.0 or higher?
have you checked your
>
>
> My % = 6.8 megs. That just seems really high while sitting there doing
> nothing but waiting.
>
>
>
I see that you are using AWL. How large is your db? This may be what is
using alot of your RAM. My AWL db is about 16MB.
---
Ed.
___
Spamass
On 29 Mar 2002 the voices made Craig Hughes write:
> Maybe we could leave the default as SPAM and then in the docs
> somewhere hidden say:
>
> SPAM really means might be spam. Do not sue.
Well, it is possible to avoid using the word SPAM, without adding much extra,
compared with t
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 09:06:29AM -0600, AHA Lists wrote:
| My % = 6.8 megs. That just seems really high while sitting there doing
| nothing but waiting.
If you rewrite it in C, then perhaps (depends on the source of memory
usage and your coding skills) it would use less memory. I think much
o
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 09:09:41AM -0600, Stuart Luppescu wrote:
| I've got SpamAssassin working pretty well with MailScanner and Vipul's
| Razor, but I can't get any reports to appear in spam.
Have you tried looking at the raw message to see if a report is there?
For MIME messages the report get
dman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The trick is to make the script put the data we want it to
> in the body of the message :-).
Exactly -- I doubt it is possible.
If you really want to see what you are dealing with, download the formmail.cgi script
itself that the site is using from
http://www.agn-e.co
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 01:11:21AM -0800, Craig Hughes wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 08:08, Charlie Watts wrote:
>
> > I'm curious if most SA users are using Subject: rewriting or not.
>
> It's the default. People are lazy. I bet it's not just the majority,
> but the *vast* majority.
>
Subj
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 01:10:08AM -0800, Craig Hughes wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 07:27, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > I'm *so* glad it's a 4 day weekend!
>
> Dammit, I need to move back to the UK
>
Canada too! (or at least for schools or governments)
--
Duncan Findlay
___
I just got some spam that had the entire body base64 encoded, it's
content-type was "multipart/mixed" with one part, the base64, which was
listed as type "text/html".
Here's what hit:
PLING,BASE64_ENC_TEXT
I see two big issues:
1) it should have hit on the "html only" test, even though it was la
I've just configured Spamassassin on a Yellow Dog Linux machine and
it's working well. However, I'm not sure how to implement per-user
prefs on this setup.
We're using vpopmail and thus a given user doesn't have a standard
login account and home directory for user_prefs. The structure for a
g
Hi all,
I've put together a few small scripts that use SpamAssassin to filter qmail
at the server level, and produce html logs summarizing what was rejected and
why. Details are here:
http://www.jfitz.com/sa-analyze/
I know there are other, (more powerful), solutions that do similar things,
but I
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 08:04:51AM -0800, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
| dman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > The trick is to make the script put the data we want it to
| > in the body of the message :-).
|
| Exactly -- I doubt it is possible.
If the spammer can send me the spam, why can't I send the listme
The way I have gotten Mailscanner and Spamassassin to work together using
procmail is to have Mailscanner running configured for NO spamassasin and
then calling Spamassassin from /etc/procmailrc like this.
:0fw
| spamassassin -P
Alternately if you want it to only work for some users you can put
On Fri, 2002-03-29 at 11:05, dman wrote:
> If the spammer can send me the spam, why can't I send
> the listme request?
Actually, now that I have taken another look at
http://dsbl.org/faq-help.html
I see that you can. I thought the "specially formatted" message had
something in the headers. All i
Spotted at the bottom of a recent
spam:
TIRED OF HITTING THE DELETE KEY? New technology STOPS SPAMand harmful email viruses BEFORE they reach your computer...FACT: Now you CAN take back 100% control of your email!
rOD.
-- "Sorry,
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Gawain
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 12:15 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Maildrop/vpopmail with Spamassassin
>
>
> I've just configured Spamassassin on a Yellow Dog Linux machine and
This is a resend. It appears that the mailing list software on
sourceforge filters out mail that contains the formmail.cgi signature
and it dropped my message which contained a quote of some formmail.cgi
output :-)
On Fri, 2002-03-29 at 11:05, dman wrote:
> If the spammer can send me the spam, wh
Whoops - not a filter, just a slow server. Sorry about the redundant
post.
-- sidney
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
So what you are saying is that they can have custom settings thru their
personal .mailfilter file but not thru their own user_prefs dir thru SA.
Correct?
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Dallas Engelken
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 200
> -Original Message-
> From: CertaintyTech - Ed Henderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 2:42 PM
> To: Dallas Engelken; 'Gawain'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Maildrop/vpopmail with Spamassassin
>
>
> So what you are saying is that they can have cust
Try "nc" instead of "netcat" -- the nice thing about netcat/nc is that
you can pipe input to it and pipe output from it, which telnet can't.
Also, it doesn't try to negotiate telnet options, which some telnets do
sometimes.
C
On Fri, 2002-03-29 at 02:09, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> mail60: netcat
>
root 3002 0.0 0.5 10364 8924 ?SMar19 0:04
/usr/bin/perl -w /usr/bin/spamd -D -d -L -c -a -F0
It's allocated 10364k on my machine, of which after 10 days uptime 8924
is resident in core, being around 0.5% of my 1.5GB -- this seems to be
about normal. What's taking up memory i
Ok, any socialist country will do.
C
On Fri, 2002-03-29 at 09:54, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 01:10:08AM -0800, Craig Hughes wrote:
> > On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 07:27, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > > I'm *so* glad it's a 4 day weekend!
> >
> > Dammit, I need to move back to the UK
>
Yes, there are a number of multipart/mixed loopholes at the moment.
Planning to use MIME::Tools to do some more serious deconstruction on
the messages and their parts in future release. At the moment I'm
actually thinking it'll be in 2.3 and I'll release 2.2 in the coming
week, since the MIME::T
Hey!
I resemble that remark!
Rick
- Original Message -
From: "Craig Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Duncan Findlay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 7:09 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Let battle commence
Ok, any socialist country will do.
C
On Fr
Something like:
POST /path/to/script HTTP/1.1\r\n
Host: foo.bar.com\r\n
scriptvar=value\r\n
scriptvar=value\r\n
\r\n
I think. You can run netcat in listen mode:
nc -l -p 9876
Then from another terminal run wget/curl against it
curl -d 'scriptvar=test' http://localhost:9876/fake/path/script.c
On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 the voices made Rick Macdougall write:
> From: "Craig Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Ok, any socialist country will do.
> Hey!
>
> I resemble that remark!
People in the US are... well... somewhat "limited" when it comes to
understanding the world... Treat them like chi
I've been manually entering what I thought were the original, default
scores for various tests into my user_prefs file. So many had
changed (from late February, when I copied the web page), that I just
checked to see if there had been a general change. What I see makes
no sense.
Why in the worl
Matthew Cline writes:
> Looking through the archives, anything that's been sent with an attachment
> ends up not having anything; either SourceForge or GeoCrawler is stripping
> them.
My mailer sends forwarded messages as RFC 822 attachments. Are they
making it? I typically send from my [EMAI
On Friday 29 March 2002 04:40 pm, Marsha Hanchrow wrote:
> Why in the world is "body Contains at least 3 dollar signs in a row
> CASHCASHCASH -0.839" now scored as a negative?
Now SA uses a Genetic Algorithm (GA) to set the scores. If any spam that $$$
appears in would have been marked as spam
On Fri Mar 29 at 04:40:09 PM, Marsha Hanchrow wrote:
> And this? "body Communigate is SPAM software COMMUNIGATE -0.351"
Well, for one thing, Communigate is not spam software. It's just mail server
software. It may sometimes be used for spam, but then so is Sendmail (I'd be
willing to bet that S
I can't get spamc v2.11 & procmail v3.11pre4 to cooperate on my
Solaris 2.8 box.
I've have spamc v2.11 and procmail v3.15 working fine on Mandrake 8.0.
On the broken system I can pipe some spam to spamc and it get's
altered, including the addition of the spam status line, just fine.
If I cat t
Kevin Cosgrove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What could be wrong here folks?
What do those procmail recipes look like?
--
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - In a variety of flavors!
A day without fusion is like a day without sunshine.
___
Spamassassi
On 29 March 2002 at 21:34, Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What do those procmail recipes look like?
The "broken" recipe looks like this:
MAILDIR=/home/kevinc/Mail
# DROPPRIVS=yes
LOGFILE=/home/kevinc/var/log/procmail
VERBOSE=yes
# Tag spam, pass non-spam untouched.
:0fw
| /
On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 the voices made Kevin Cosgrove write:
> The "broken" recipe looks like this:
Since you didn't quote the problem (and I don't remember it) I'll just point
out a thing or two anyways...
> # File a copy of the spam.
> :0:
> * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
> spamspool
This won't
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 07:09:13PM -0800, Kevin Cosgrove wrote:
> The "broken" recipe looks like this:
[...]
> # Tag spam, pass non-spam untouched.
> :0fw
> | /home/kevinc/bin/spamc -p 7783
Add a "-f" (filter) to spamc so it passes the message along in
your .procmailrc.
-Scott
__
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 04:06:54PM -0800, Craig Hughes wrote:
| Something like:
|
| POST /path/to/script HTTP/1.1\r\n
| Host: foo.bar.com\r\n
| scriptvar=value\r\n
| scriptvar=value\r\n
| \r\n
Ahh, part of the headers. I read somewhere that it was sent to CGI
scripts on stdin, but maybe the web
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 08:02:47PM -0800, Scott Doty wrote:
| On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 07:09:13PM -0800, Kevin Cosgrove wrote:
| > The "broken" recipe looks like this:
| [...]
| > # Tag spam, pass non-spam untouched.
| > :0fw
| > | /home/kevinc/bin/spamc -p 7783
|
| Add a "-f" (filter) to spam
At 2:04 PM -0600 on 3/29/02, Dallas Engelken wrote:
>If you need to set a catchall, then you'd edit $VPOP.
>NOTE: Editing the catchall through QmailAdmin will screw up your
>.qmail-default file. You would need to patch QmailAdmin to edit the new
>.qmail-default file... or just set .qmail-defaul
Check perms. When I installed this puppy a few days back (Yep, a newbie),
the perms on the *.cf files were set in such a way that spamd could not
read them (readable only by root). Once that was fixed spamc/spamd started
working.
I also wound up changing the daemon line in the init script, a
On 29 March 2002 at 20:02, Scott Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # Tag spam, pass non-spam untouched.
> :0fw
> | /home/kevinc/bin/spamc -p 7783
Add a "-f" (filter) to spamc so it passes the message along in
your .procmailrc.
-Scott
I just tried that. No difference. Any more idea
On 30 March 2002 at 4:51, "Tony L. Svanstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # File a copy of the spam.
> :0:
> * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
> spamspool
tls> This won't file a _copy_ of the spam, it will file the spam
tls> and then sto= p; if you really want a copy of it (ie that
tls> the filtering wil
Permissions are readable by all. The test example you show
works just fine. It's only from procmail that spamrc doesn't
seem to connect to spamd [on my Solaris 2.8 box installed in
my account space]. The whole thing works just dandy installed
in system
The solution turned out to be very simple... place the -p conf_file
flag *before* the -P flag:
xfilter "/usr/local/bin/spamassassin -p $STD_PATH/spamassassin.conf -P"
Hope this helps somebody else.
Gawain
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PR
On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 01:38:24AM +0100, Tony L. Svanstrom wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 the voices made Rick Macdougall write:
>
> > From: "Craig Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > Ok, any socialist country will do.
>
> > Hey!
> >
> > I resemble that remark!
>
> People in the US are... w
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 10:35:49PM -0600, dman wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 08:02:47PM -0800, Scott Doty wrote:
> | On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 07:09:13PM -0800, Kevin Cosgrove wrote:
> | > The "broken" recipe looks like this:
> | [...]
> | > # Tag spam, pass non-spam untouched.
> | > :0fw
> | >
68 matches
Mail list logo
