Hi,
I got a spam mail (recognized as such by SA 2.20) but the matching tests
lack one which recognizes the body of the mail containing almost only
characters > 128.
CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADERS and SUBJ_FULL_OF_8BITS are triggered by this mail
but shouldn't there be a matching test for the body of th
Hi,
I've been using SA for about 2 months now and have been running with the
default threshold of 5 hits.
With the new version 2.20 I got a false positive with a newsletter
I receive.
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=6.8 required=5.0 tests=EXCUSE_3,
HTTP_WITH_EMAIL_IN_URL version=2.20
X-Spa
On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> SA *is* distributed under both licenses.
It's moot now, of course, but the point was that different parts of SA
could be distributed under different and non-overlapping licenses if the
install procedure was sufficiently clever.
_
I edited something in local.cf today and tried to restart spamd, but to no
avail. This is what I get on the command line:
root@vampire:/var/mail# /usr/local/bin/spamd -d -a -u mail
Can't write '/dev/null': Permission denied at /usr/local/bin/spamd line
640.
Line 640 in spamd is the part that st
I decided to run spamd with the -D line and these are its results when I
run /usr/local/bin/spamd -d -D -u mail (I left out the -a this time):
debug: ignore: test message to precompile patterns and load modules
debug: using "/usr/local/share/spamassassin" for default rules dir
debug: using "/etc
--- Quoting Kenneth Chen on 2002/04/21 at 12:03 -0700:
[ snip ]
> Can't write '/dev/null': Permission denied at /usr/local/bin/spamd line
> 640.
>
> Everything seems to look okay except for the very end where it complains
> about not being able to write to /dev/null
ls -l /dev/null
I've had
At 02:56 PM 4/21/2002 +0200, Klaus Heinz wrote:
>Or is a threshold of 5 too low ? What do other people use ?
I typically use 8 to 9
--- eric
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassi
I think one thing we're learning with each x.y0 release of spamassassin is that
rule scores need to be tweaked after the GA runs, and that within a week or so
after x.y0 we need to release x.y1, which fixes almost all scoring issues. I
agree that 4.1 is probably a little high for that rule; proba
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- Quoting Kenneth Chen on 2002/04/21 at 12:03 -0700:
>
> [ snip ]
> > Can't write '/dev/null': Permission denied at /usr/local/bin/spamd line
> > 640.
> >
> > Everything seems to look okay except for the very end where it complains
> > about not being able to write
On Saturday 20 April 2002 10:42 pm, Michael Moncur wrote:
> As I understand it from reading bug # 227, the 'triplets.txt' file should
> be in the rules directory? After running 'make install' on a couple of
> different CVS versions, the file hasn't been copied to
> /usr/local/share/spamassassin/ w
I would like to thank Richard, Matt, Charlie, Tony, Rich, and anyone else I
may have missed for giving me some stats on spam. Unfortunately, it's not
quite what I need.
As I said before, I'm working on a complementary antispam technique that
should provide extremely high barriers to spam visi
On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 05:06:55PM -0400, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> So, any ideas on:
>
> number of active spammers per day
NFC
> number of pieces of Spam sent per day
I support ~30k users, I see ~1.5m messages a day, and block ~1m of them as
spam
> number of people receivi
I'd like to get my junk mail in a daily digest. Right now it all gets
stuffed into a file called ~/Junk.
Does anyone have a routine that will take this file and generate a
single email in digest form, complete with index?
Thanks,
--Yan
--
Daddy, did all the hair that fell off your head stick
At 02:30 PM 4/21/2002 -0700, Kelsey Cummings wrote:
>On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 05:06:55PM -0400, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> > So, any ideas on:
> >
> > number of active spammers per day
>
>NFC
>
> > number of pieces of Spam sent per day
>
>I support ~30k users, I see ~1.5m messages a day
Hi guys:
lore@vampire:/dev$ ls -al null
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root24507 Apr 21 15:04 null
This is Slackware; no idea why it happened. I deleted the file and
followed my friend's:
mknod /dev/null c 1 9
chmod a+w /dev/null
and now it works... hmm.
Thanks everyone,
Kenneth
On Sun, 21
I just noticed that spamd logs incoming spamc calls with resolved hostnames
instead of IP addresses.
Now I know we should all have caching DNS servers/etc, but wouldn't we get a
wee performance improvement if spamd didn't resolve? If you're using SA on a
server that isn't a nameserver, then there
On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 06:00:50PM -0400, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> At 02:30 PM 4/21/2002 -0700, Kelsey Cummings wrote:
> >On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 05:06:55PM -0400, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> > > So, any ideas on:
> > >
> > > number of active spammers per day
> >
> >NFC
> >
> > > numb
At 22:56 21/04/2002, you wrote:
>I'd like to get my junk mail in a daily digest. Right now it all gets
>stuffed into a file called ~/Junk.
>
>Does anyone have a routine that will take this file and generate a
>single email in digest form, complete with index?
I was thinking this. I'm intending t
Yeah, it might help some. Your nameserver is probably smart enough to set a
really long TTL on localhost <-> 127.0.0.1 though, and your OS is hopefully
smart enough to not look it up again before TTL expires.
C
Jason Haar wrote:
JH> I just noticed that spamd logs incoming spamc calls with reso
...
> So let's
> say it's closer to 8 billion pieces of spam per day.
...
> we are still looking at
> somewhere between 30,000 and 100,000 additional machines necessary for
> spammers to be able to deliver their wares.
Total. For 8 billion pieces of spam. That's nothing.
You said it yoursel
At 09:19 PM 4/21/2002 -0400, Jim Paris wrote:
>...
> > So let's
> > say it's closer to 8 billion pieces of spam per day.
>...
> > we are still looking at
> > somewhere between 30,000 and 100,000 additional machines necessary for
> > spammers to be able to deliver their wares.
>
>Total. For 8 bill
...
> so, in contrast to 28,800 possible messages in the day, an unencumbered
> spammer could deliver between 147744 and 4060800 pieces of spam. yes,
> 28,000 messages is a lot but it's one helluva lot less than 150,000.
...
I think you'll find that most spammers are not limited by the fatness
This is draft 4 of the HOWTO-WIN32-SpamAssassin
The main changes
- lotsa syntax corrections
- AutoWhiteList FIXED!
- EventLog options for Spamd included
The remaining issues (but not so big as before)
- Whether the maintainers of SpamAssasin want to integrate this (with
appropriate checks for
> >Or is a threshold of 5 too low ? What do other people use ?
>
> I typically use 8 to 9
I keep my threshold at 7.0 for 2.11 and that seems to work as well for the
current release. I have about one spam message slip through for every 30-40
that are caught, but only about half of those that slip
Hello - I just joined the list.
I looked through the archives about my problem and I saw dialog but no
resolution.
I too am experiencing the undefined Razor::Client message in my procmail
logs. SpamAssassin works fine alone and Razor works fine alone. I ran the
checks - files are there.
Any
Jim Paris wrote:
JP> Sure, the numbers can be debated (and I'm not really interested in
JP> doing so). But you will at least agree, I hope, that your hashcash
JP> solution will slow down spammers _only_ if they happen to be sending
JP> more than 28,800 per day. (Or 10,000 a day depending on com
Upgrade SA to 2.20 or downgrade Razor to 1.19
C
Doug Crompton wrote:
DC> Hello - I just joined the list.
DC>
DC> I looked through the archives about my problem and I saw dialog but no
DC> resolution.
DC>
DC> I too am experiencing the undefined Razor::Client message in my procmail
DC> logs. Sp
On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Upgrade SA to 2.20 or downgrade Razor to 1.19
>
Ok I did and the problem went away. BUT my spamassassin headers still
say 2.11 Is it possible this was not changed? I am definitely using the
2.20 stuff.
Doug
* Doug Cro
Header example - using 2.20, no errors but shows 2.11
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=13.0 required=4.8
tests=DEAR_SOMEBODY,CLICK_BELOW,
CLICK_HERE_LINK,CTYPE_JUST_HTML,RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM,
X_OSIRU_SPAMWARE_SITE version=2.11
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Checker-Ver
29 matches
Mail list logo