[SAtalk] Re: exim, spamassassin as gateway

On Tue, 2002-09-24 at 23:48, Mark Roach wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 10:32:09AM -0500, Jeremy Turner wrote: > > > > When email goes through exim to a non-local destination, it is scanned > > properly, but there is a break in the email header: > > > Hi, Jeremy. dman has put a very good howto o

[SAtalk] spamd and razor

I'm having a problem with spamassassin and razor2. If I run spamassassin < some.mail - the mail i checked both against rbl's and razor along the configuration in /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf. The sample-spam.txt mail in the spamassassin directory is getting a score of 20,6,. If I instead us

Re: [SAtalk] spamd and razor

On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:20:29 +0200 "Peter M. Nielsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Spamd is started as follows: spamd -L -x -d -H /etc/razor -u vpopmail and > spamc -c -f. man spamd: -L, --localUse local tests only (no DNS) razor and rbl are local checks and as such ar

Re: [SAtalk] New install 2.41

On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 12:30:06AM -0500, Doug Dempsey wrote: > I have recently installed 2.41 on a clean install. I was using 2.20. > Spamassassin is in the headers but it not picking up anything. I am not sure > what I missed. Here are my headers. Thanks for the help. > > qmail-scanner-1.12 (uv

Re: [SAtalk] spamd and razor

DOOH! Thanx - I really missed something - Peter Lars Hansson wrote: >On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:20:29 +0200 >"Peter M. Nielsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Spamd is started as follows: spamd -L -x -d -H /etc/razor -u vpopmail and >>spamc -c -f. >> >> > >man spamd: > >-L, --local

[SAtalk] Re: user_prefs ignored

The other solution to this problem is to use the $LOGNAME variable that's set by procmail to be the local recipient. So, when you call spamc, include the -u option followed by $LOGNAME (-u $LOGNAME) and spamc calls spamd as the final recipient, allowing spamd to read their local user_prefs. This

Re: [SAtalk] spamd and razor

On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 21:36:57 +0759 Lars Hansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > razor and rbl are local checks and as such are not executed when the -L switch > is used. Err, are /not/ local checks. ;) --- Lars Hansson --- This sf.net email is

[SAtalk] spammers whitelisting themselves

I'm running SA 2.31 with postfix and amavisd-new as a anti-spam mail filtering server. It is working quite well, but I notice some emails get through the system which are clearly spam, and the logs show that they were allowed through because the sender was whitelisted. But I have not whitelisted

[SAtalk] spam assassin and Digital Unix 4.0e (Tru64)

Hi, i have compiled and am running 2.20. I have compiled 2.31. I had to comment out line 50 in spamd/spamc.c. When it compiles I get several pointer mismatch (ptrmismatch) errors. When i try to compile 2.41 I get the pointer mismatch warnings (from spamc.c and libspamc.c) and from utils.c I g

Re: [SAtalk] Re: spammers whitelisting themselves

On Wednesday 25 September 2002 12:42 pm, Scott Henderson wrote: > From: Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Amavisd-new has its own SMTP sender whitelist. Check your > >amavisd.conf file. > Sorry, I neglected to mention. I have looked there too. Nothing > in there. The problem is hiding somew

[SAtalk] Very amusing spam headers...

I just got yet another worldreach spam. However a couple of the headers in the message are so wildly malformed it's quite funny... Such as this one: X-MAILER: Excite InboxJuno 4.0.11mail.comMicrosoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00

[SAtalk] Why did 2.41 let this through?

Why did 2.41 let this through? Looks like AWL gave it a big credit, why? How do I correct this behavior? Ollie Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 10381 invoked from network); 25 Sep 2002 22:51:33 - Received: from

Re: [SAtalk] Why did 2.41 let this through?

1) 2.42 should help correct this kind of stuff, since it uses a from/ip combination, and should use it correctly. The behavior of the AWL in 2.41 is somewhat broken. (albeit I can't see why it screwed that up, your headers are a bit strange see my comments on munging) 2) de-whitelist your own

[SAtalk] Postfix and high load

(i'll describe my situation first, the questions are at the end) I managed to make SpamAssassin talk to my Postfix MTA. Brief description of the method: 1. Get & install SpamAssassin (obvious) 2. Get spampd http://www.worlddesign.com/index.cfm/rd/mta/spampd.htm Install various Perl modules req

Re: [SAtalk] spammers whitelisting themselves

> "SH" == Scott Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: SH> I'm running SA 2.31 with postfix and amavisd-new as a anti-spam SH> mail filtering server. It is working quite well, but I Amavisd-new has its own SMTP sender whitelist. Check your amavisd.conf file. --

[SAtalk] Not Tagging

Why would SA not be tagging spam when the required hits have been exceeded? Thanks Doug Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 11644 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2002 17:49:15 - Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 11640 invoked by uid 505

[SAtalk] open of AWL file failed: Cannot open auto_whitelist_path

On startup, with spamd OPTIONS="--debug --daemonize --create-prefs --auto-whitelist --username=nobo dy --nouser-config --allowed-ips=192.168.1.10,127.0.0.1" Sep 25 13:34:44 mogwai spamd[15500]: debug: 15500 Trying to get lock on /var/spool/spamassassin/auto-whitelist pass 0 Sep 25 13:34:44 mogw

Re: [SAtalk] Not Tagging

On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 12:50:52PM -0500, Doug Dempsey wrote: > Why would SA not be tagging spam when the required hits have been exceeded? > > qmail-scanner-1.12 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4224. spamassassin: 2.41. . > Clear:SA:0(21.5/6.0):. Processed in 1.799955 secs); 25 Sep 2002 > 17:49:15 - > X-S

[SAtalk] Re: spammers whitelisting themselves

>From: Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >SH> I'm running SA 2.31 with postfix and amavisd-new as a anti-spam >SH> mail filtering server. It is working quite well, but I > >Amavisd-new has its own SMTP sender whitelist. Check your >amavisd.conf file. Sorry, I neglected to mention. I have looked

RE: [SAtalk] Not Tagging

It works properly during the tests. -Original Message- From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 1:00 PM To: Doug Dempsey Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [SAtalk] Not Tagging << File: ATT00073.dat >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2002

[SAtalk] Razor problem

I just picked up Razor SDK 2.03 and 2.14 agents from the the razor site. I am using SuSe 7.3 - intalled SDK with no problems. All tests passed. When I try to make the 2.14 agents I get all kinds of errors. In particuliar it says the net::dns is missing. But it seems to be there. The SDK test pas

[SAtalk] Razor2 check is skipped

Hi All, I'm running SpamAssassin 2.41 with razor-agents-2.14 razor-agents-sdk-2.03 on both a Solaris 2.8 computer, and a Linux RedHat 7.3 computer. We're using Perl V5.8.0. When I run both spamassassin and spamc/spamd, I get this error message then Razor2 checks get skipped: spamd[9594]: razor

Re: [SAtalk] Razor2 check is skipped

Hi All, On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 11:42:05PM -0700, Andrew Flury wrote: > Quoting "Cheryl L. Southard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I don't understand why it can't find "new" because I can see the "new" > > routine in /usr/local/lib/perl/site_perl/5.8.0/Razor2/Client/Agent.pm. >