[SAtalk] (no subject)

__ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin

[SAtalk] (no subject)

__ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin

[SAtalk] (no subject)

__ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin

[SAtalk] (no subject)

__ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin

[SAtalk] (no subject)

__ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin

[SAtalk] RFC: Running SpamAssassin on Win32

Ok, I've put together my findings on porting SpamAssassin to Win32. I plan to post this as a HOWTO on an HTML web page at some point if it passes muster with you guys. A few notes: - I'm not a perl expert - heck I barely know perl. So be gentle in your comments, please! - The sections which may

[SAtalk] 2 more quick comments

1. Sorry for the blank e-mails - I hit send once by accident on yahoo. Sigh 2. The builds were performed on these systems ActivePerl Build 631 (1/2/02) SpamAssassin 2.11 Razor Agents 1.19 Win98SE Win2000 __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center -

[SAtalk] Further proof I'm a dope

1. I pasted the RFC twice. Sorry guys! Yeesh, it's like my brain don't work (see point 2 for evidence) 2. There's a mistake in the instructions in that it says pm_to_blib: spamassassin doc/.made Change it to pm_to_blib: spamassassin doc/.made Of course, the second line should be pm_to_blib:

Re: [SAtalk] Installing SpamAssassin 2.1.1 on AIX

--On Sunday, April 14, 2002 12:10 PM -0700 Craig R Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sounds like AIX needs to be added to the list of OSes which don't define > this. Any idea what preprocessor symbols AIX defines? __AIX__ maybe? Smells like _AIX to me. It's been way too long since I did a

[SAtalk] Re: RFC: Running SpamAssassin on Win32

Personally I think it's much easier to use cygwin to get both spamassassin and razor to run on a win32 machine. The benefit is that the install doesn't require any modification of code, and it installs just like it would on a unix box, and you don't loose any functionality. If you don't want

[SAtalk] Spamassassin corrupting mail file

Hi I have just installed Spamassassin on my Redhat 7.1 system and I am having a small problem. Spamassassin is correctly identifying emails as spam but seems to corrupting the mailbox when writing the email back to it. I am using the daemon and spamc via procmail. Any suggestions would be appr

RE: [SAtalk] Spamassassin corrupting mail file

> Spamassassin is correctly identifying emails as spam but seems to > corrupting > the mailbox when writing the email back to it. > > I am using the daemon and spamc via procmail. > Post your procmail recipe. Problem probably lies there. ___ Spamas

[SAtalk] Problem with Spamd part of SA 2.11

We have recently upgraded from SA 2.01 to SA 2.11. We use a site-wide installation of SA on our SMTP gateway and smapc is used by the MTA to call spamd. I have noticed a problem with the new version of spamd. When I look at the log file I no longer see lines of the type spamd[9222]: clean messag

Re: [SAtalk] Spamassassin corrupting mail file

- Original Message - From: "CertaintyTech - Ed Henderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Andrew Stephen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 10:13 PM Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamassassin corrupting mail file > > Spamassassin is correctly identifying emails as sp

[SAtalk] Problem with Spamd part of SA 2.11 (fwd)

I have made other tests of the new spamd and it does not work. No spam are flagged and the X-Spam-Status field is never added to messages. We use qmail-scanner-1.10 to call spamc which itself calls spamd. Thanks in advance. Michel MINSOUL SEGI, University of Liege B26 - Sart Tilman B-4000

[SAtalk] Request for an announce list

Would it be possible to create an announce list that solely reports new stable releases? In the meantime, I've set up to monitor , but this produces false positives for both bleeding-edge releases and changes in

[SAtalk] Directions for individual users

In you have a section for "Installing SpamAssassin for Personal Use (Not System-Wide)". Could I please suggest adding the following section: Using SpamAssassin as a Mail Relay for Personal Use

[SAtalk] Are there any commercial SpamAssassin proxy services?

I have gotten SpamAssassin set up as a mail proxy so that all likely spam are tagged as such and automatically filtered to a separate mailbox, where I can check for false positives at my convenience. Am I nuts in thinking that nearly everyone on the Internet would like a similar service, and many

Re: [SAtalk] Are there any commercial SpamAssassin proxy services?

I tend to like thinking bigger. Watch this space. C Dan Kohn wrote: DK> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 09:10:28 -0700 DK> From: Dan Kohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> DK> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DK> Subject: [SAtalk] Are there any commercial SpamAssassin proxy services? DK> DK> I have gotten SpamAssassin set up

Re: [SAtalk] Are there any commercial SpamAssassin proxy services?

"Dan Kohn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Am I nuts in thinking that nearly everyone on the Internet would > like a similar service, and many of them are willing to pay for it? I guess we'll find out soon enough. There are three of these projects underway currently (I'm doing one of them) that I

[SAtalk] 2.20 delayed

You've probably all noticed a lack of a 2.20 release over the weekend. Well, blame the weather. I was out in the park listening to the Giants on the radio and playing with my nephew. And today I'm busy with "real" work, then hosting a dinner party tonight. There were also some weird issues

[SAtalk] SA 2.11 munging messages

I have a server that performs a backup of a PostgreSQL database with pg_dump, piping the output through bzip, uuencode and mail so that the dump gets e-mailed to my account. Since converting to SA I've noticed a lack of these daily backups... Further investigation shows that the e-mail, which c

Re: [SAtalk] 2.20 delayed

At 10:01 AM Monday, 4/15/2002, Craig R Hughes wrote -=> >blame the weather. I was out in the park listening to the Giants on the >radio Outstanding! Another Giants fan Ed ~~ Ed Kasky Los Angeles, CA . . . . . . . . Some people would not recognize subtlety if it hit them on the head. __

Re: [SAtalk] SA died sometime this morning

On Sun, Apr 14, 2002 at 10:10:27AM +0100, Sean Rima wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Sometime around 3am SA died on me. I use the current CVS version. I > cannot say why SA has such a short life as there are no error messages > in the syslog or the mail log file. > >

[SAtalk] Razor availavable, how to disable in SA

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I have Razor installed but find that I am getting a number of false hits where dcc is not finding the same ones. Is there anyway to disable Razor in the SA config. See Ya, Sean - -- Sean Rimahttp://www.tcob1.net

[SAtalk] Messages being munged [was: some random topic]

Barry L. Kline wrote: BLK> Any ideas what I need to do to fix this? Quite likely a mailbox locking bug. Could you post your whole procmail recipe? C ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/s

Re: [SAtalk] 2.20 delayed

Ed Kasky wrote: EK> At 10:01 AM Monday, 4/15/2002, Craig R Hughes wrote -=> EK> >blame the weather. I was out in the park listening to the Giants on the EK> >radio EK> EK> Outstanding! Another Giants fan EK> Ed Kasky EK> Los Angeles, CA ^^^ Ouch! That must suck. C __

Re: [SAtalk] SA 2.11 munging messages

On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 01:41:47PM -0400, Barry L. Kline wrote: | I verified | that by watching the transfer during fetchmail. It mentioned that | there were 5 e-mails, and transferred 5, including the one that | contained the 382005 tuple message with e-mail attachment. | | Once the mail passe

[SAtalk] Re: Messages being munged [was: some random topic]

Craig R Hughes wrote: > > Barry L. Kline wrote: > > BLK> Any ideas what I need to do to fix this? > > Quite likely a mailbox locking bug. Could you post your whole procmail recipe? > > C Here's the only thing in the recipe in /etc/procmailrc: :0 c /tmp/passthrough :0fw | spamc I added

[SAtalk] Re: Messages being munged [was: some random topic]

Barry L. Kline wrote: BLK> Craig R Hughes wrote: BLK> > BLK> > Barry L. Kline wrote: BLK> > BLK> > BLK> Any ideas what I need to do to fix this? BLK> > BLK> > Quite likely a mailbox locking bug. Could you post your whole procmail recipe? BLK> > BLK> > C BLK> BLK> Here's the only thing in th

Re: [SAtalk] SA died sometime this morning

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Kelsey Cummings moaned: >> Sometime around 3am SA died on me. I use the current CVS version. I >> cannot say why SA has such a short life as there are no error messages >> in the syslog or the mail log file. >> >> If anyone know

RE: [SAtalk] SA 2.11 munging messages

> If you manually add a line like > From Mon Apr 15 13:49:45 CDT 2002 > right here above the Received: line, the message will no longer be > "embedded" in the previous one. That 'From ' line (but don't indent > it) is the message separator in the mbox format. > If you run spamd with "-F 1" o

[SAtalk] Re: Messages being munged [was: some random topic]

Craig R Hughes wrote: > > The delivery part of the recipe is what I was wondering about -- how is the mail > getting injected into your mailbox? Also, you should lock /tmp/passthrough by > doing: > > :0c: > /tmp/passthrough > > with the trailing : on the line > > C I thought the delivery par

Re: [SAtalk] SA 2.11 munging messages

CertaintyTech - Ed Henderson wrote: > > > If you manually add a line like > > From Mon Apr 15 13:49:45 CDT 2002 > > right here above the Received: line, the message will no longer be > > "embedded" in the previous one. That 'From ' line (but don't indent > > it) is the message separator in t

Re: [SAtalk] Messages being munged [was: some random topic]

Craig R Hughes wrote: > > Barry L. Kline wrote: > > BLK> Any ideas what I need to do to fix this? > > Quite likely a mailbox locking bug. Could you post your whole procmail recipe? > > C > Your comments and further investigation gives me an idea of the problem. Based on the docs from spamd

Re: [SAtalk] Messages being munged [was: some random topic]

spamd does not write to mailboxes. The -P option is for "spamassassin" which works somewhat differently. spamc will take the message from procmail, and pass it to spamd, which will process it, and return it back to spamc again, which will pass it on back to procmail. Without further instruct

Re: [SAtalk] Messages being munged [was: some random topic]

Craig R Hughes wrote: > > spamd does not write to mailboxes. The -P option is for "spamassassin" which > works somewhat differently. spamc will take the message from procmail, and pass > it to spamd, which will process it, and return it back to spamc again, which > will pass it on back to procm

[SAtalk] What does whitelist_from apply to?

Sorry if this is an FAQ, if so, please point me to the answer. I'm having a problem with postmaster email that contains errors related to spam (and therefore the spam) getting tagged. I tried to whitelist_from it, but that doesn't seem to be working. What does whitelist_from refer to? The From

[SAtalk] Spawning processes

I have had SpamAssasin running on Redhat 7.1 for a couple of weeks now. Over the weekend it started spawning processes and crashed the server. Any reason why it possibly did this? Was it just a freak thing or should I worry? Justin -- "Answers are a prison for oneself" Justin S. Wi

Re: [SAtalk] Re: Messages being munged [was: some random topic]

On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 11:49, Barry L. Kline wrote: > Here's the only thing in the recipe in /etc/procmailrc: Wouldn't that make spamc run as root? Does that mean you have to give spamc the -u option to get user prefs (IIRC - I am not at a machine with spamassassin docs right now). Or even better,

[SAtalk] Re: False Positives and SpamAssassin

[moved from Razor-users mailing list]: On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 11:36, Craig R Hughes wrote: > Is the problem that you're seeing "real" email generating scores in > excess of 30 in SA, or that people are ignoring the warning and > reducing the threshold substantially below 30? Craig - As someone sa

Re: [SAtalk] RFC: Running SpamAssassin on Win32

Hello Michael, > Ok, I've put together my findings on porting SpamAssassin to Win32. I > plan to post this as a HOWTO on an HTML web page at some point if it > passes muster with you guys. Nicely done, worked on the first try! (Spamassassin 2.20, ActivePerl Build 631, Windows 2000) Now I pray s

Re: [SAtalk] Messages being munged [was: some random topic]

Craig R Hughes wrote: > > spamd does not write to mailboxes. The -P option is for "spamassassin" which > works somewhat differently. spamc will take the message from procmail, and pass > it to spamd, which will process it, and return it back to spamc again, which > will pass it on back to procm

Re: [SAtalk] 2.20 delayed

At 11:39 AM Monday, 4/15/2002, Craig R Hughes wrote -=> >EK> Outstanding! Another Giants fan > >EK> Ed Kasky >EK> Los Angeles, CA > ^^^ > >Ouch! That must suck. Only when I'm stuck in traffic or yearning for Clement St. dim sum on Sundays However, my oldest son is livi

Re: [SAtalk] reporting, filtering options

> > 2. Although SA seems to be doing a good job, a few spam still get > > through every day. I've been reporting these to spamcop all along, > > but is there anywhere else I should be reporting them? And conversely, it would be nice if SA would assume that e-mails coming from your own mailser

Re: [SAtalk] SA 2.11 munging messages

On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 03:21:40PM -0400, Barry L. Kline wrote: | dman wrote: | > On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 01:41:47PM -0400, Barry L. Kline wrote: | -- [snip] -- | > If you manually add a line like | > From Mon Apr 15 13:49:45 CDT 2002 | > right here above the Received: line, the message will

[SAtalk] Re: Using CYGWIN to port to Win32

This probably would be cleaner; but my goal so far has been a "reasonably easy", transparent install, that even an experienced windows-but-not-unix-admin could sort of get going and CYGWIN looks like it adds a buncha stuff in. OTOH, I will be the first to admit that my knowledge of Unix function

Re: [SAtalk] spamc not working also

I still haven't got this issue resolved and would like some more input on it. Everything lookes correct in my /etc/resolv.conf, /etc/hosts, and /etc/nsswitch.conf. However, when I do: $ host localhost I get: [root@ryloth root]# host localhost Host localhost. not found: 3(NXDOMAIN) Any help wo

[SAtalk] spamd warnings

Here's what I get when I try to run the current CVS version of spamd: [root@nanaimo spamassassin]# spamd/spamd -d -x -u mail -s local6 Constant subroutine __stub_lgammal redefined at /usr/lib/perl5/5.00503/i386-linux/gnu/stubs.ph line 58. Constant subroutine __stub_lgammal_r redefined at /usr/l

Re: [SAtalk] spamc not working also [SOLVED!]

Ok... just figure this out. For some dumb reason, I didn't have a localhost record in my zone file for my domain. Once I added that in, it worked. The one question I have was that I had it configured in my /etc/nsswitch.conf to look at the files first: [dan@ryloth dan]$ grep ^hosts: /etc/nss

[SAtalk] Re: [SAdev] spamd warnings

On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 02:32:53PM -0700, Daniel Rogers wrote: > Also, can the -w be removed from CVS? Now that I look for it, spamassassin has '-w' too. Is this something that's done in CVS then removed for release, or what? Dan. ___ Spamassassin-

Re: [SAtalk] spamc not working also [SOLVED!]

On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 03:54:26PM -0600, Dan Wilson wrote: > The one question I have was that I had it configured in my /etc/nsswitch.conf > to look at the files first: > > [dan@ryloth dan]$ grep ^hosts: /etc/nsswitch.conf > hosts: files nisplus dns > > Why didn't it look at my /etc/host

Re: [SAtalk] Re: Messages being munged [was: some random topic]

On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 02:49:04PM -0400, Barry L. Kline wrote: > :0 c > /tmp/passthrough > > :0fw > | spamc Try adding :0: /path/to/your/mailbox -- Duncan Findlay ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.n

Re: [SAtalk] SA 2.11 munging messages

dman wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 01:41:47PM -0400, Barry L. Kline wrote: > -- [snip] -- > | Any ideas what I need to do to fix this? > > Locking. mbox is horrible when it comes to data integrity in the face > of parallel updates. > > | BEGIN CLIPPED SECTION - > | > | Thanks, >

Re: [SAtalk] SA 2.11 munging messages

Hummm, I am not sure of your diagram below | POP3_server -> fetchmail -> procmail -> spamd -> sendmail_local -> | mailbox Spamd returns the message back to procmail, so that is procmail that interacts with whatever is sendmail_local. So it would read rather: spamd

Re: [SAtalk] Re: Using cygwin to port to Win32

On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 02:07:08PM -0700, Michael Bell wrote: >This probably would be cleaner; but my goal so far has been a >"reasonably easy", transparent install, that even an experienced >windows-but-not-unix-admin could sort of get going and CYGWIN looks >like it adds a buncha stuff in. Des

Re: [SAtalk] What does whitelist_from apply to?

Ken Causey wrote: KC> Sorry if this is an FAQ, if so, please point me to the answer. KC> KC> I'm having a problem with postmaster email that contains errors related KC> to spam (and therefore the spam) getting tagged. I tried to KC> whitelist_from it, but that doesn't seem to be working. What d

Re: [SAtalk] Spawning processes

Justin Wilson wrote: JW> I have had SpamAssasin running on Redhat 7.1 for a couple of weeks now. JW> Over the weekend it started spawning processes and crashed the server. Any JW> reason why it possibly did this? Was it just a freak thing or should I JW> worry? Haven't heard any instances o

Re: [SAtalk] Re: False Positives and SpamAssassin

Sidney Markowitz wrote: SM> [moved from Razor-users mailing list]: SM> On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 11:36, Craig R Hughes wrote: SM> > Is the problem that you're seeing "real" email generating scores in SM> > excess of 30 in SA, or that people are ignoring the warning and SM> > reducing the threshold su

Re: [SAtalk] spamc not working also

Dan Wilson wrote: DW> I still haven't got this issue resolved and would like some more input on it. DW> DW> Everything lookes correct in my /etc/resolv.conf, /etc/hosts, DW> and /etc/nsswitch.conf. DW> DW> However, when I do: DW> $ host localhost DW> DW> I get: DW> [root@ryloth root]# host localh

Re: [SAtalk] reporting, filtering options

Chuck Wolber wrote: CW> And conversely, it would be nice if SA would assume that e-mails coming CW> from your own mailserver were not spam. Many of my majordomo subscription CW> messages are being marked as spam (not too big an issue since we're moving CW> to mailman at some point). Not wise --