Hello,
I've been getting an increasing problem where spamassassin will hang (take
longer than procmail, by default, thinks it should take) and procmail
will kill it. Then procmail, I think, sticks a corrupted message in my
mailbox because it thinks it got the whole message when it didn't. This
on
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Craig R. Hughes mused:
> Nix wrote:
>
> N> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Michael Stenner said:
> N> > Genetic Algorithm. Clever method for optimizing complicated
> N> > mathematical systems.
> N>
> N> Or, rather, for searching large and irregularly defined spaces (spaces
> N> that ar
Am Mit, 2002-05-15 um 16.18 schrieb Jim Scott:
> SPAM: Content analysis details: (39.9 hits, 5 required)
> SPAM: Hit! (-0.1 points) Subject: ends in a question mark
> SPAM: Hit! (3.0 points) BODY: Contains "Toner Cartridge"
[...]
> SPAM: Hit! (3.0 points) Listed in Razor, see http://razor.so
Vivek Khera wrote:
> I read email with VM in XEmacs, and every once in a while it complains
> about bothced MIME like this:
>
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Learn How To Grow Your Portfolio
>9806Dl5
> Date: Wed, 15 May 2002
I know this sounds like a stupid newbie work around, but I
thought I would throw it out there and see who tells me "now Dave, this can't be
done because" ;-)
I found the .sh file that is used to start/stop/status the
spamd. I now have a cron job that monitors for the spamd process to d
Michael, et al --
...and then Michael Stenner said...
%
% On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 03:41:01PM -0500, David T-G wrote:
% > % Razor wants all spam that is VERIFIED BY A HUMAN to be spam.* So yes,
% >
% > So even if SA says that it racks up an 11.7 I should send it in, either
% > 'cuz I got it at
Craig --
...and then Craig R Hughes said...
%
% Check out the /masses directory in the distribution. It has all that stuff in
% there, and a README which I think is more or less up to date.
Ah, cool. Thanks.
I have some questions about what constitutes "spam scattered through
mailboxes" and
Folks:
I've got procmail filtering my spam into a special mailbox in my IMAP
folders.
Is there any way to submit the entire mailbox, full of collected spam,
through the reporting feature (spamassassin -r)?
razor-report has the -M parameter that allows this, it would be nice if SA
had something si
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 08:41:06AM -0500, David Gibbs wrote:
> Is there any way to submit the entire mailbox, full of collected spam,
> through the reporting feature (spamassassin -r)?
> razor-report has the -M parameter that allows this, it would be nice if SA
> had something similar.
You may be
Are there any step-by-step FAQs or HowTos on implementing SpamAssassin on a
relay server and does anyone currently have this implemented? Which would be
the easiest to setup/manage with SpamAssassin as a relay box - Exim, Postfix,
Sendmail, Qmail, ...?
Brian Snipes
__
David --
...and then David Gibbs said...
%
% I've got procmail filtering my spam into a special mailbox in my IMAP
% folders.
Always a good idea.
% Is there any way to submit the entire mailbox, full of collected spam,
% through the reporting feature (spamassassin -r)?
It depends on your mai
> -Original Message-
> From: Brian Snipes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 9:15 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin on firewall or relay box
>
>
> Are there any step-by-step FAQs or HowTos on implementing
> SpamAssassin on a
> relay serv
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 09:14:44AM -0500, Brian Snipes wrote:
| Are there any step-by-step FAQs or HowTos on implementing SpamAssassin on a
| relay server and does anyone currently have this implemented? Which would be
| the easiest to setup/manage with SpamAssassin as a relay box - Exim, Postf
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Henrick Yau wrote:
> >From
>
> becomes
>
> rom
On Thu, 16 May 2002, Mark Bynum wrote:
> I've been getting an increasing problem where spamassassin will hang (take
> longer than procmail, by default, thinks it should take) and procmail
> will kill it.
>
> Every time t
At 08:12 AM 5/16/02 -0500, David T-G wrote:
>% > So now how far back should I go? I have *lots* of old, confirmed
>% > spam (see my other thread; I have lots of confirmed not-spam, too).
>% > Is anything over, say, an hour old useful?
>%
>% Sure.
>%
>% 1) internet propagation can be weird
>%
>
Theo Van Dinter said:
> On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 08:41:06AM -0500, David Gibbs wrote:
>> Is there any way to submit the entire mailbox, full of collected spam,
>> through the reporting feature (spamassassin -r)?
>> razor-report has the -M parameter that allows this, it would be nice
>> if SA had so
> "ON" == Olivier Nicole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
ON> Now, a score has to be assigned for each rule, so the GA and as
ON> importantly a corpus of spam/non-spam is used. But going into too many
ON> details may also be confusing as most of the users will not need to
ON> deal with the GA.
Gi
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 10:25:43AM -0500, David Gibbs wrote:
> One enhancement I could suggest though ... provide an option to remove the
> message from the mbox file after it has been reported.
I don't want to go editing files. The way I use it is that I have a
script which takes the mbox and r
Anyone have a set of timeout values that works well for them? I'm
seeing the problem that messages > 250kb will get timed out when going
through spamassassin...
I'm using
INPUT_MAIL_FILTER(`spamassassin',
`S=local:/var/run/sendmail/spamass.sock, F=, T=C:15m;S:4m;R:4m;E:10m')
(picked off the web
After reading this thread fo a while, I wonder why one would want
to report spam that sa has already caught? It seems to me (and I've only
been using SA a few days), that you'd want to report spam that it missed.
By the way, I'm VERY impressed with SA! I had one false positive
from
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 08:42:15AM -0700, Hallikainen HAROLD Friends wrote:
> After reading this thread fo a while, I wonder why one would want
> to report spam that sa has already caught? It seems to me (and I've only
> been using SA a few days), that you'd want to report spam that it misse
I'm seeing the same problem as well. We discussed this a while back and
nothing really came of it. Periodically I will try some different
arguments in the startup script or the procmail recipe, but the fact
remains that everything seems to be ignored unless you use spamassassin -P
in the procmail
This works just fine for me:
# Run the mail through SpamAssassin
:0fw
| spamc
# And check the results...
:0
* ^X-Spam-Flag: YES
personal/dialupmaybespam/
spamc is in my path, I'm running SA 2.20. My spamc lives in /usr/local/bin/spamc. Sure
you don't have path problems?
Bye for no
like the subject says... This is one of the most common spam recipients
that I receive... would be nice to get it added to the master list.
also, what's the reasoning for not letting users define filtration regex's
in their user files?
-Chris
__
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 09:52:13AM -0700, Chris Petersen wrote:
> also, what's the reasoning for not letting users define filtration regex's
> in their user files?
It depends on your setup. If each user is invoking spamassassin
directly form procmailrc, then it's no problem. If spamd is runnin
> I've got procmail filtering my spam into a special mailbox in my IMAP
> folders. Is there any way to submit the entire mailbox, full of
> collected spam, through the reporting feature (spamassassin -r)?
> razor-report has the -M parameter that allows this, it would be nice if
> SA had somethin
This works for me:
--
:0fw
| /usr/bin/spamassassin -P
-
This results in no discernable scanning:
-
:0fw
| /usr/bin/spamc
-
>
>
> # Run the mail through SpamAssassin
> :0fw
> | spamc
>
> # And check the results...
> :0
> * ^X-Spam-Flag: YES
> per
> It depends on your setup. If each user is invoking spamassassin
> directly form procmailrc, then it's no problem. If spamd is running
> as root (or some other user), then there can be security concerns,
> especially since some of the rules require an eval.
aha, that makes sense, then...Ev
Hi, all --
I'm curious as to why the attached mail made it through with such a low
score. I've just read six months' worth of postings regarding the
sightings list and am now thoroughly confused regarding how I should
submit (RFC822 MIME attachment, I think), what I should submit (actual
spam th
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 10:12:53AM -0700, Chuck Wolber wrote:
| This results in no discernable scanning:
|
| -
| :0fw
| | /usr/bin/spamc
| -
What happens if you run
echo "test" | spamc
at a shell prompt?
You did start spamd before running spamc, right?
-D
--
A)bort, R)
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 09:52:13AM -0700, Chris Petersen wrote:
| like the subject says... This is one of the most common spam recipients
| that I receive...
Is it a properly formatted header according to the relevant RFCs? If
not, this entry in an ACL in my exim.conf rejects it at SMTP time
>> Is there any way to submit the entire mailbox, full of collected
>> spam, through the reporting feature (spamassassin -r)?
Chuck> Check out something called formmail
I think you might have better luck searching for "formail". ;-) Try this:
formail -s spamassassin -r <
> Is it a properly formatted header according to the relevant RFCs? If
> not, this entry in an ACL in my exim.conf rejects it at SMTP time.
not sure there. presumably it's all ok.
> If you want, how about coming up with a test like exim's that looks
> for syntactic validity of the header. All
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Skip, et al --
...and then Skip Montanaro said...
%
% >> Is there any way to submit the entire mailbox, full of collected
...
% I think you might have better luck searching for "formail". ;-) Try this:
%
% formail -s spamassassin -r < mbox
Hi all, I just
barely subscribed to the list and I have a question...
We did a bit of an
experiment in using SpamAssassin over the past month and just disabled it last
night. We have roughly 9000 email accounts on our server and we
mass-enabled spam assassin for them. Only 78 used the
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 02:24:51PM -0500, David T-G wrote:
> Oh! So spamassassin expects and can handle only a single message at a
> time, or at least particularly with the -r flag? Maybe I didn't really
> submit some 8300 messages of collected spam to razor after all!
Correct. You probably re
Given these lines in my user_prefs file:
header MUSI_CAL_GIG_GOPHER Subject: =~ /Musi-Cal Tour Fetch:/
describe MUSI_CAL_GIG_GOPHERSubject: indicates it's a Gig Gopher message
score MUSI_CAL_GIG_GOPHER -5.0
spamd -F reports (wrapped):
debug: Failed to parse line in S
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 03:40:42PM -0500, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> header MUSI_CAL_GIG_GOPHER Subject: =~ /Musi-Cal Tour Fetch:/
>
> The format looks just like the examples in the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf man
> page and the 20_header_test.cf file to me. The regular expression is pretty
> tri
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 03:39:44PM -0400, Justin Robinson wrote:
> We did a bit of an experiment in using SpamAssassin over the past month and
> just disabled it last night. We have roughly 9000 email accounts on our
> server and we mass-enabled spam assassin for them. Only 78 used the opt-out
>
On Thu, 16 May 2002, Chuck Wolber wrote:
> This works for me:
> --
> :0fw
> | /usr/bin/spamassassin -P
> -
> This results in no discernable scanning:
> -
> :0fw
> | /usr/bin/spamc
Just for grins, what happens if you change that to
:0fw
| /usr/bin/spamc -u
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 01:49:26PM -0700, Daniel Rogers wrote:
> Were you using spamc/spamd?
For a few days there, Razor was responding very slowly. Have you
optimized the SA configuration to do only local checks? With enough
waiting around for something like Razor, your load would go up
signif
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Theo, et al --
...and then Theo Van Dinter said...
%
% On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 02:24:51PM -0500, David T-G wrote:
% > Oh! So spamassassin expects and can handle only a single message at a
% > time, or at least particularly with the -r flag? Maybe
We are not using Razor, so I do not believe it should be an issue with that.
Justin
-Original Message-
From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 4:55 PM
To: Justin Robinson; spamtalk (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Speed/Performance Issue
On Thu, M
>> The format looks just like the examples in the
>> Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf man page and the 20_header_test.cf file to
>> me. The regular expression is pretty trivial too. What am I
>> missing?
Theo> Try "Subject", not "Subject:".
Nope, that's not it... :-( I had alread
Hello,
I just got the below spam and didn't see a hit for the empty "From"
line. Shouldn't the NO_REAL_NAME test have caught this?
Thanks.
--
Matt
X-Mail-Format-Warning: Bad RFC822 header formatting in >From matt Thu May 16 13:19:16
2002
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EM
>>> What am I missing?
Theo> Try "Subject", not "Subject:".
Skip> Nope, that's not it... :-( I had already tried "subject" and "Subject".
Skip> Should have mentioned it in my post.
Found it. In the ::Conf man page it says:
These settings differ from the ones above, in tha
By popular demand, here's my mimedefang-filter script. If you use it,
please be sure to change the email addresses in it. :)
The only part that I still do in /etc/procmailrc is to check for
'X-Spam-Flag: YES' and redirect the mail accordingly.
(And yes, I know that mimedefang says you shouldn'
On Thu, 2002-05-16 at 12:39, Justin Robinson wrote:
> We are running FreeBSD 4.3-Release, sendmail 8.12.2, procmail 3.15.1, and
> spamassassin 2.11
Some of the bugs that have been reported and fixed since 2.11 had to do
with rules with regexps that took really long times at high loads on
some inp
Chris Petersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> anyway, just a suggestion. It's a "check" on a variety of other spam
> filters that I've seen, so I thought I'd mention it.
We already have both a check for valid undisclosed recipients and
invalid ones. I recently tweaked the invalid one to match
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 03:34:47PM -0400, Bryan Fullerton wrote:
> One of my users who really, really likes SA was wondering if there
> are t-shirts available. :)
If the GNUS MUA can have a t-shirt, certainly SA can. :-)
Jeremy
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yaho
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 04:29:03AM -0600, Michael Moncur wrote:
> >Using the -t flag I'm told the USER_IN_WHITELIST test contributed a -100 to
> >the hits. Unfortunately, I don't have any ebay.com addresses (or glob
> >patterns involving ebay.com) in my user_prefs file.
>
> I think the 60_whitel
The whitelist_from, whitelist_to, AWL and blacklist functions are not
working. Everything else in SA 2.20 seems to work well. These are critical
features for my users.
I have installed SA 2.20 on a RH 6.2 box. Sendmail. There is only one
"real" user on the system, me. I am also
Ich werde ab 16.05.2002 nicht im Büro sein. Ich kehre zurück am
21.05.2002.
Ich werde Ihre Nachricht(en) nach meiner Rückkehr beantworten.
mfg
I will answer after returning to the office.
Regards
Wolfgang Fuertbauer
___
Have big pi
>From the messages I've seen recently on this subject, I don't think I'm the
only person who can't get the spamc/spamd combination working. I'm using SA
v2.11 on a Mandrake 8.1 system with perl 5.6.1. (Well, now I'm running
2.20. See below.)
If I run spamd from a terminal window as root like
I have a question for those of you who administer machines that run SA. If
your users don't have login accounts (e.g., /bin/false as a shell), how do
they fiddle their user_prefs? Or don't they?
Thx,
--
Skip Montanaro ([EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.mojam.com/)
"Excellant Written and Communic
Is this same problem in procmail 3.15.2 or 3.21? I'd rather try and
get a better procmail than have everyone have to add those two lines
to procmail, so that it works on every recipe. Have you asked for the
patch on the procmail-dev list? I'll ask, if not.
Thanks,
Mark
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 0
I wrote a simple CGI interface which allows them to make modifications to
their accounts. It simply puts the information into a mysql table.
Justin
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Skip
Montanaro
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 11:38 PM
T
57 matches
Mail list logo
