Any one has a good sample for local.cf?
---
Sponsored by: AMD - Your access to the experts on Hammer Technology!
Open Source & Linux Developers, register now for the AMD Developer
Symposium. Code: EX8664 http://www.developwithamd.com/develop
On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> The procmail bug happens when the filter program does something that
> procmail doesn't expect. Exactly what that something is, hasn't been
> confirmed by anyone on the procmail list. It might be exiting with a
> nonzero status, or it might be produc
Gary Funck said:
> Do you have any suggestions on how to handle this situation? Since users
> sometimes send e-mail to themselves, it isn't approrpiate to trap on that
> criteria.
upgrade to 2.41, the auto-whitelist in that version avoids that problem;
it tracks IPs as well as names.
--j.
---
Matt Kettler said:
> There's very little content that would be unique to pornographic spam. You
> could probably create rules which match "psycho sluts" and "fucking whores"
> and have some points added to them, but the S/O ratio will not be very good.
worth noting that the bayesian code will
I'm thinking "antivirus application"
On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Ed Greenberg wrote:
> I get a bunch of mail that looks like this:
>
> >Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Received: from out008.verizon.net (out008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.108])
> > by hagrid.greenberg.org (Postfix) with ESMT
I've seen several recent references in SA-talk to "S/O" and "S/O Ratio". I
don't find it mentioned in the 2.30 sources I have laying about and googling
for it didn't turn up any obvious winners either. All I can think of is
"Spam to Ollie ratio". What is it really?
Thx,
--
Skip Montanaro
[E
On Mon, Sep 16, 2002 at 08:53:02PM -0600, Darryl Bleau wrote:
> I'm trying to get SA to run on Novell (Perl 5.6). Has anyone else tried this? My
>major issue seems to be HTML::Parser which uses Parser.xs. I've tried to compile it
>as an NLM with some success, however it complains a lot about mis
Hi Theo,
My "site_perl" path doesn't include the Perl version for "historical"
reasons. SA and Razor2 are indeed in the same area: Razor2 and Mail are
both in /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl. I installaed both manually,
rather than via CPAN (which keeps trying to upgrade my version of Perl
while p
Just for info, in case those of you using SpamAssassin are suffering
similarly...
>From 06:40 (BST) this morning, SpamAssassin (version 2.31 running on 3
different servers) started taking a minimum of 28 seconds to process a
message. I've done quite a bit of poking about with it and it appears
Hi'ya folks..
Hopefully the woes of installing SA have finally been solved..
Anyone know the location of perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-2.31, and where the
start-up scripts are located.. It may not be the lastest version, but knock
on wood I haven't recieved any errors so far..
Always.. Doug
-
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Justin Mason
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 4:09 AM
> To: Gary Funck
> Cc: Spamassassin List
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] how to handle white listed falsified From: address
>
>
>
>
> Gary Funck said
I have to agree with Ross. I too have the Novell monkey on my back, to the tune of 50+
NW5.1 servers. But I don't use any of them to filter email.
If you can spare the hardware, a Un*x machine is your best option. I was able to build
a box running RedHat 7.2, Qmail, Qmail-Queue-Scanner and Spa
Hi Joe,
I am the network admin for a fairly large school district. We have some 5000+ users
and at least 2000 of them use our email system. Our network configuration, like so
many other school districts, is largely based on Novell Netware. Our email system is
Novell's Groupwise. Groupwise's in
At 06:15 AM 9/17/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>I'm thinking "antivirus application"
>
>On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Ed Greenberg wrote:
>
> > I get a bunch of mail that looks like this:
> >
By the time I see it, it's mime has somehow been broken. It just shows up
as ascii text. My virus checker(s) (McAfee on
On Mon, Sep 16, 2002 at 09:17:35PM -0700, Ed Kasky wrote:
> Last week you asked to see one of the emails that causes spamassassin to
> stop. This one caused it to end with a "Broken pipe"
I think I've figured this out... The "dccproc: command not found"
bug was fixed for checking, but not repo
A new one dropped in today:
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Sep 17 02:32:10 2002
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from domain.com (IDENT:vJOZX4JS12QEzRRGzbZm0jNb9/n3FOaJ@domain
[192.99.99.1])
by domain.com (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g8H9W9V20563
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> >
> > upgrade to 2.41, the auto-whitelist in that version avoids that problem;
> > it tracks IPs as well as names.
> >
>
> Thanks Jason (and Bret). I installed 2.41 (via CPAN) and it fixed the
> problem.
>- Gary
er, make that Bart (Schaefer). Thanks again. - Gary
---
Ein Bielaczyc said:
> Hi Joe,
>
> I am the network admin for a fairly large school district. We have some
> 5000+ users and at least 2000 of them use our email system. Our network
> configuration, like so many other school districts, is largely based on
> Novell Netware.
Netware good.
> Our ema
Hi all,
I was trying to get the pop3proxy software mentioned in the Spamassassin
"where" page, but it appears that the site is down. (Some type of Dynamic
DNS site). Anyone know of an alternate site to get it from?
_
Chat wi
I noticed since the latest version was released that a variety of people
have mentioned that it hasn't worked as well (rules changes) for them as
the earlier version. I remember someone suggesting waiting for 2.5 before
updating. Any thoughts on this? I would like to update but not sure
whether to
Skip Montanaro said:
>
> I've seen several recent references in SA-talk to "S/O" and "S/O Ratio". I
> don't find it mentioned in the 2.30 sources I have laying about and googling
> for it didn't turn up any obvious winners either. All I can think of is
> "Spam to Ollie ratio". What is it real
Can anybody point me to a project/FAQ similar to this:?
1. Perl script fetches POP mail from a distant server
2. mail is fed to SA, running as a standalone module in my user account
3. SA spits out results back to perl script.
4. Script deletes offending mail.
I don't have root access. I don't
>
> razor2 check skipped: No such file or directory Can't locate object
> method "new" via package "Razor2::Client::Agent" at
> /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/Mail/SpamAssassin/Dns.pm line 374.
>
> I can't see what changes between the two ways of running SA. Razor
> itself seems to work properly
follow up:
>
> - I'm a bit confused regarding the distinction between Razor, and
> Razor2. I
> added the Razor package via CPAN, but I see from e-mail traffic
> on this list
> that if I'm running SA version 2.41, I should go to Razor2? I did see a
> installation warning message similar to the one
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Justin Mason wrote:
> (Excuse my use of the "ham" terminology, but I like it ;)
I'm sure it's not kosher, but I like it to.
--
Theodore Heise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> West Lafayette, IN, USA
---
This SF.NET email is
"Gary Funck" said:
> > Thanks Jason (and Bret). I installed 2.41 (via CPAN) and it fixed the
> > problem.
> >- Gary
> er, make that Bart (Schaefer). Thanks again. - Gary
...and Justin ;)
--j.
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by: AMD -
I upgraded from 2.31 to 2.41 w/Razor2 about a week ago and have noticed a
substantial improvement. Many fewer false-positives, (none so far) and no
false negatives. I'd say go ahead and upgrade.
Darren
_
I noticed since the latest version was released that a va
follow up:
> > - I'm a bit confused regarding the distinction between Razor, and
> > Razor2. I
> > added the Razor package via CPAN, but I see from e-mail traffic
> > on this list
> > that if I'm running SA version 2.41, I should go to Razor2? I did see a
> > installation warning message similar t
On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 09:19:10AM -0700, Gary Funck wrote:
> - how has Vipul's Razor been working for you? I saw some reports about VR
> taking a long time to process incoming messages. We don't have a lot of mail
> traffic here, so that may not be an issue, but we'd like to know in advance
> if
Try fetchmail. I've not used it, but I think it'll do exactly what you want,
and you might not even need to wrap it in perl. From the man page:
If no port 25 listener is available, but your fetchmail
compilation detected or was told about a reliable local
MDA, it will use t
On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 02:33:55PM +0100, Caines, Max wrote:
> My "site_perl" path doesn't include the Perl version for "historical"
> reasons. SA and Razor2 are indeed in the same area: Razor2 and Mail are
> both in /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl. I installaed both manually,
Ok, that's valid as
Hi All,
I have a question on the directive ok_locales from the documentation:
ok_locales xx [ yy zz ... ] (default: all)
Which locales (country codes) are considered OK to receive mail from. Mail
using character sets used by languages in these countries, will not be
marked as possibly being spa
| > it seems like SA is trying to upgrade you preferences file
| (and fails because it is run by amavisd-new in perl -T mode)
| > Looks like a problem report for SA people.
>From Brian May:
| According to Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, who suddenly woke up
| when I reassigned this bug to spa
i just thought i'd waste more bandwidth with
yet another unanswered post. this will be the 4th
time i have posted this question. i expect it will be
the 4th time i do not get any kind of a response.
i gather that SA people have an issue with postfix.
most emails i have read about postfix and SA
"Hill, Ronald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi All,
>
> I have a question on the directive ok_locales from the documentation:
>
> ok_locales xx [ yy zz ... ] (default: all)
>
> Which locales (country codes) are considered OK to receive mail from. Mail
> using character sets used by languages
Mark Martinec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is hard to judge decisions made by SA people, when I'm not following
> the discussions there closely. From amavisd-new standpoint it is
> certainly unfortunately if SA must no longer be called with perl
> in -T mode. This certainly worked in SA versi
>From another list (for John Hardin's Sanitizer)...
-- Snip ---
On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 15:21, Brett Glass wrote:
(Subject, dropped F at start of message.)
> This problem is so common that maybe someone should publish an AQ
> about it. ;-)
Just had this happen the other day because
I use John Hardin's Sanitizer Procmail script for this.
http://www.impsec.org/email-tools/procmail-security.html
<>
|-Original Message-
|From: Skip Montanaro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 9:12 PM
|To: Lars Hansson
|Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: Re: [SAtal
"dogface" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> i just thought i'd waste more bandwidth with yet another unanswered
> post. this will be the 4th time i have posted this question. i
> expect it will be the 4th time i do not get any kind of a response.
> i gather that SA people have an issue with postfix.
Hello, after installing Razor2, I had to bang through a few more
installation difficulties. At this point, I've installed the following
additional modules:
Archive-Tar-0.22 Digest-Nilsimsa-0.06Net-Telnet-3.03
Attribute-Handlers-0.77 Digest-SHA1-2.01Params-Validate-0.2
from what i have read on this list
i would of expected nothing less than
the response i got from you.
A. after 3 posts maybe someone could have said
that there are no options for what i am asking.
B. i already said that i read all i could find because
i did not get any help from this list. i hav
"Gary Funck" said:
> Hello, after installing Razor2, I had to bang through a few more
> installation difficulties. At this point, I've installed the following
> additional modules:
>
> Archive-Tar-0.22 Digest-Nilsimsa-0.06Net-Telnet-3.03
> Attribute-Handlers-0.77 Digest-SHA
On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 05:58:11PM -0500, dogface wrote:
> from what i have read on this list
> i would of expected nothing less than
> the response i got from you.
I'm confused. This mailing list is generally quite informative.
> A. after 3 posts maybe someone could have said
> that there are n
Hi Justin,
I'm a novice at the adiministration of Perl libraries (clearly), so am not sure
how things are supposed to look when they work, but the following output from
"make install" inside of the razor-agents-2.14 directory looked a little odd to
me:
# make install
/bin/sh -c true
/bin/sh -c t
I would sack postfix before SA. Was any attempt made to query a postfix
mailing list?
Since postfix is installed, I assume that sendmail is not a viable
alternative (to be honest I am waiting for the next release of amvis or
spamass-milter. Someone mention mime-defang milter also supports SA but I
> Well, then few people know how to use SA with postfix. I use SA with
> procmail. Of course, I won't be able to help you.
There's a webpage somewhere that explicitly lists how to call SA from
postfix as a content filter.
http://www.advosys.ca/papers/postfix-filtering.html
First Google hit on
* SpamTalk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote this on 09 17, 02 at 22:25:
> I would sack postfix before SA. Was any attempt made to query a postfix
> mailing list?
No need; see my earlier email.
msg07860/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 05:58:11PM -0500, dogface wrote:
> > from what i have read on this list
> > i would of expected nothing less than
> > the response i got from you.
>
> I'm confused. This mailing list is generally quite informative.
>
> > A. af
I missed the original question...I'm assuming that someone wants to
integrate SA into postfix without using procmail?
My answer would be to try the /etc/postfix/master.cf file. In that file,
you have options to pipe smtp sent mail through various options...in fact,
it is through this file tha
And here is the answer...exactly like what I thought could be done.
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Mike Leone wrote:
> > Well, then few people know how to use SA with postfix. I use SA with
> > procmail. Of course, I won't be able to help you.
>
> There's a webpage somewhere that explicitly lists how to
Saw this on the postfix list; thought it might be of use. Posting to the
postfix list if you have questions that impact/interact with postfix is a
good idea.
- Forwarded message from Scott Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 13:08:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Henderson <
I've been seeing some bounce messages and got curious... The messages
bounce because the sender is bogus of course but the original message
had this lovely header. Would it be a good idea to have a rule to check
the To, From, and Reply-To for the same address.
Received: (from daemon@localhost
Is this one of your mailings? I didn't think you'd be sending attachments
(although I don't worry too much about them, with Norton's AND a Mac!
I'm just being careful...
Thank you,
Barbara Cofer
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by: AMD -
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, SpamTalk wrote:
> I would sack postfix before SA. Was any attempt made to query a postfix
> mailing list?
I can tell you that Postfix/Procmail/SA work very well together. I have
another procmail/perl filters already running (an email sanitizer --
looks for dangerous execu
54 matches
Mail list logo
