Hi List,
as long as there is this discussed AWL behaviour i am actually quite
happy that my SA cannot open it, but in the end i would want to get rid
of this error:
Oct 9 09:23:03 hermes spamd[28990]: debug: 28990 Trying to get lock on
/home/wagner/.spamassassin/auto-whitelist pass 0
Oct 9
I maintain two relatively high volume mail servers both of which have
been using Spamassassin for some time mow. Everything has always worked
fine and I have always upgraded to the newest stable versions when released. I
upgraded to 2.42 on both of my servers (one is running postfix with
postb
Steve Yuroff said:
> I currently have 2.11 installed and running fine, and am ready to move
> to 2.42. I'll be using the CPAN intaller, and have 2 simple questions:
> Is it "acceptable" to just run the CPAN install command while my mail
> server is up and running, and probably going to invoke
> I've already upgrades from SA 2.31 to 2.40. I'm now going to 2.42 and
> figured I'd ask a simple question. What is the easiest method of upgrading?
I like to be able to specify where stuff goes, so use the .tar
For historic reasons I put SA in /usr/localbin (yes, just the 2 slashes)
and my sou
(Please feel free to forward this message to other possibly-interested
parties.)
Hi all,
One of the big problems working with spam classification, is finding good
mail to test with. There are few public corpora available; Ion
Androutsopoulos' "Ling-spam" corpus is one (hi Ion!), but unfortunate
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 03:01:43AM -0700, Quinn Vallance wrote:
> I maintain two relatively high volume mail servers both of which have
> been using Spamassassin for some time mow. Everything has always worked
> fine and I have always upgraded to the newest stable versions when released. I
> up
On Wednesday 09 October 2002 14:27 CET Jost Krieger wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 03:01:43AM -0700, Quinn Vallance wrote:
> > I maintain two relatively high volume mail servers both of which have
> > been using Spamassassin for some time mow. Everything has always worked
> > fine and I have alw
On Wednesday 09 October 2002 01:19 CET Chad Frerer wrote:
> The problem I'm having is that when mail is received via fetchmail (cron
> job)... all the mail is being delivered to root. It only has this
> problem when I specify the MDA in .fetchmailrc as spamasassin. When I
> remove the mda line a
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 03:25:46PM +0200, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> This sounds like a really grave problem. Could you please open a bug in
> bugzilla.spamassassin.org? Quinn, do you run on Solaris, too?
Done, bug 1087.
>
> And there's really nothing in the syslog? If it's possible, could you p
Random pondering, just how robust is the checking of the files in
$HOME/.spamassassin/, ie how does SA deal with problem lines (ignore
them or flag an error?)
Mark
--
The Flying Hamster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.korenwolf.net/
Of chess it has been said that life is not long enough
no takers on this one ?
- Original Message -
From: "zenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "spamassassin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 10:48 PM
Subject: [SAtalk] Outlook users reporting spam
> hi all
> how do you guys recommend i setup a system where by our local outlook
At 13:51 08/10/2002 +0200, Stephane Lentz wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 11:32:18AM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>> "viviane.correge" said:
>>
>> >I am running on a Readhat 7.1 system :
>> >
>> >Compiled/installed sendmail 8.12.5, install
> -Original Message-
> From: Quinn Vallance [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 5:02 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Re: Spamd 2.42 Problems
>
>
> I maintain two relatively high volume mail servers both of which have
> been using Spamassassin fo
Justin wrote:
> - All headers are reproduced in full. Some address obfuscation has
> taken
> place; hostnames in some cases have been replaced with
> "example.com",
> which should have a valid MX record (if I recall correctly). In
> most
> cases though, the headers appear as t
Like I reported before , this happened in 2.41 with Perl 5.6. And running
in debug didn't give any hints either. If I don't use the -m switch, the
problem will never occur. I upgraded to 2.42 and continued to not use
the -m switch, and I haven't had a crash once.
Chris Kalin
Netwurx, Inc.
---
I have noticed the same thing with version 2.41 and perl v5.6.1... however,
I have never used the -m switch and the spamd process still dies under heavy
traffic.
When spamd dies I see the following lines in my syslog:
Oct 9 08:20:27 mail-server spamc[12047]: connect() to spamd at 127.0.0.1
fai
Running spamassassin (2.20) site-wide, using spamc/spamd.
I noticed some mailing lists (Like Debian ones) tag emails with a
X-Spam-Level flag.
And my local spamassassin retags emails, without taking away the
X-Spam-Level flag set by other mailers, so I have two of them in each email
I receive fr
Well, one option that doesn't require code changes would be to add a
recipe before your spam filter that strips SA markup (assuming you're
using procmail).
Like:
# Clear out other SpamAssassin markup
:0fw
| spamassassin -d
then the rest of your recipes.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, DEFFONTAINES Vincent
| Since I do not think I want anyone external to my domain decide
| for me what
| I consider as spam or not, maybe it could be fine that Spamassassin would
| remove the X-Spam-* flags it finds in headers before its scan?
I'm no procmail/formail guru (barely even ever used formail), but wouldn't
s
Craig Hughes said:
> > - All headers are reproduced in full. Some address obfuscation has
> > taken place; hostnames in some cases have been replaced with
> > "example.com", which should have a valid MX record (if I recall
> > correctly). In > most cases though, the headers appear as t
this problem also occurs if you have your mail forwarded from other
sites that run sa.
my personal solution is to put the hostname of the sa reporter in the
report header, so i can recognize where the report is coming from,
and then choose to accept or delete it.
(i add it as a comment within
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 06:39:00PM +0200, DEFFONTAINES Vincent wrote:
> I noticed some mailing lists (Like Debian ones) tag emails with a
> X-Spam-Level flag.
> And my local spamassassin retags emails, without taking away the
> X-Spam-Level flag set by other mailers, so I have two of them in each
On Wednesday 09 October 2002 19:46 CET Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 06:39:00PM +0200, DEFFONTAINES Vincent wrote:
> > I noticed some mailing lists (Like Debian ones) tag emails with a
> > X-Spam-Level flag.
> > And my local spamassassin retags emails, without taking away the
>
Currently running 2.21, hopefully moving to 2.42 (3?) waiting to see how the
current spamd failing issue works out.
I have been trapping a number of low scoring spam using the rules wizard in
outlook dump any message with the word "offers" in the headers (normally
seen as "offers@" or offers.domai
Outlook dropped the post in the folder too, hee hee, proving the superiority
of a scoring based system and a binary dumper.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 08:07:30PM +0200, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> No, it doesn't. At least not always ;-) SA first checks for the existence of
> a X-Spam-Status header. If this one exists, it will remove all X-Spam-*
> headers. As this mail contains only a X-Spam-Level, it won't be removed.
>
On Wednesday 09 October 2002 20:51 CET Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 08:07:30PM +0200, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> > No, it doesn't. At least not always ;-) SA first checks for the
> > existence of a X-Spam-Status header. If this one exists, it will remove
> > all X-Spam-* headers.
At 01:28 PM 10/9/2002 -0500, SpamTalk wrote:
>Currently running 2.21, hopefully moving to 2.42 (3?) waiting to see how the
>current spamd failing issue works out.
>I have been trapping a number of low scoring spam using the rules wizard in
>outlook dump any message with the word "offers" in the he
This French spam just came across the XFS for Linux ML:
>Received: from oss.sgi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by oss.sgi.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g99I5KtG005084;
> Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:05:20 -0700
>Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-xfs); Wed, 09 Oct 2002 10:56:31 -
070
If you report the spam to Bonded Sender, after enough complaints they will
supposedly revoke the bond of the offender and they won't be in the list
anymore.
Chris Kalin
Netwurx, Inc.
- Original Message -
From: "Ralf G. R. Bergs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "SpamAssassin-Talk ML" <[EMAIL PROT
On Wednesday 09 October 2002 21:13 CET Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
> This French spam just came across the XFS for Linux ML:
> [...]
>
> So there!! :-(
So there what?
> I just set the score for RCVD_IN_BONDEDSENDER to 0.0.
>
> On http://www.bondedsender.org/referred.html it says to report the
> mess
On Wednesday 09 October 2002 21:12 CET Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 01:28 PM 10/9/2002 -0500, SpamTalk wrote:
> >Currently running 2.21, hopefully moving to 2.42 (3?) waiting to see how
> > the current spamd failing issue works out.
> >I have been trapping a number of low scoring spam using the rules
Hi,
I'm trying to verify that my SpamAssassin is working properly. The first
thing I notice is that I only get this debug info on the first email that SA
processes. That isn't correct is it?
My SA run statement looks like this:
/usr/bin/perl /usr/bin/spamd -H /usr/local/bin/ -D
>From man spamd
-i ipaddress, --listen-ip=ipaddress, --ip-address=ipad?
dress
Tells spamd to listen on the specified IP address
[defaults to 127.0.0.1]. Use 0.0.0.0 to listen on all
interfaces.
What would be accomplished by its listening on 0.0.0.0? What
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 13:32:37 -0700, you wrote:
>What would be accomplished by its listening on 0.0.0.0? What would be the
>downside of doing so?
Seems to me that in a system with multiple mail servers, you could do all the
spam checking on a single box. Though why you would have multiple mail
It's just another form of decimal notation scam. I have a program in my palm
to convert just such little beasties :) Users with a clue somtimes use the
same aproach to defeat web filters. THey want their porn that bad at work,
fine. I just get to show the boss that cool little palm ap and show him
On Wed, 09 Oct 2002 21:39:27 +0200, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
[...]
>> On http://www.bondedsender.org/referred.html it says to report the
>> message. Of course I will not do that -- I fear that might have the
>> adverse effect of producing even more spam. :-(
>
>... and of course won't Bonded Sender
The other cool palm app is the one that cracks the "encrypted" Cisco
passwords. You feed the garbled version and it spits the plaintext of the
password. As often as not someone has an old printout of the config laying
around and it's a bunch easier than the password recovery rigmarole.
Although fr
> -Original Message-
> From: Frank Pineau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Martes, 08 de Octubre de 2002 18:49
> To: Spamassassin List
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] New spammer trick (aka: stupid browser trick)
>
>
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 14:37:57 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >| 0xD5.0xEF.0x8F.0x9D
I've loaded SA 2.42. I'm trying to get Razor2 to run. All registration,
etc is running fine. However, I get the following error in my Maillog:
razor2 check skipped: Permission denied Can't call method "log" on unblessed
reference at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/Razor2/Client/Agent.pm line 21
On 09 Oct 2002, Mark Lowes mused:
> Random pondering, just how robust is the checking of the files in
> $HOME/.spamassassin/, ie how does SA deal with problem lines (ignore
> them or flag an error?)
It prints an error out (see the failed_line: label in
lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf.pm), and increme
Attached are low-scoring (1.5, 3.5) emails, could someone push 'em through
2.42 and see if they get tagged?
-Original Message-
From: Malte S. Stretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 2:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] "offers" in header a good
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 05:04:45PM -0500, Smart, Dan wrote:
> razor2 check skipped: Permission denied Can't call method "log" on unblessed
> reference at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/Razor2/Client/Agent.pm line 211,
> line 186.
>
> I assume a log is trying to be written somewhere, and my spamd
I would, but they're binary (Outlook?) files...
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
| SpamTalk
| Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 3:27 PM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: RE: [SAtalk] "offers" in header a good rule for trapping spam
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 03:04:29PM -0500, VCI Help Desk wrote:
> thing I notice is that I only get this debug info on the first email that SA
> processes. That isn't correct is it?
What are you wondering about specifically?
> /usr/bin/perl /usr/bin/spamd -H /usr/local/bin/ -D -d -x -u mail
I really hate to post to this group but I get no responses from anyone,
anywhere in this regards.
Ever since going to Redhat 8.0 using Sendmail I am unable to send emails
out. All of the emails going out are getting Deferred Connection; Timed Out.
I am receiving emails just fine, just can't se
If you have multiple network interfaces, and you want other systems to be
able to run spamc to connect to your spamd daemon, you might tell the
system to listen on all interfaces/ip addresses to accomplish this.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Robin Lynn Frank wrote:
> >From man spamd
> -i ipaddress, --l
>they're binary (Outlook?) files...
Yeah, saving them out (as .msg) doesn't help, still binary. Futz I hate that
company. Anyone know how I can get these flipping outlook emails saved in a
format suitable for processing?
-Original Message-
From: Steve Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Se
Save as a text file (or copy/paste into one), then view the headers
(View/Options), copy & paste into the top of the text file. HTML emails are
a little trickier.
Gotta love Micro-we-support-open-standards-Soft...
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> SpamTalk
> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 4:22 PM
> To: SpamTalk
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] "offers" in header a good rule for trapping spam
>
>
> >they're binary (Outlook?)
On Wednesday 09 October 2002 04:05 pm, vernon wrote:
> I really hate to post to this group but I get no responses from anyone,
> anywhere in this regards.
>
> Ever since going to Redhat 8.0 using Sendmail I am unable to send emails
> out. All of the emails going out are getting Deferred Connection
Steve,
I found this perl script to convert .msg to mbox on a metacrawler search,
care to try it?
http://www.xs4all.nl/~mvz/software/msgconv.html
-Original Message-
From: Steve Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 6:39 PM
To: SpamTalk
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 03:43:18PM -0500, Frank Pineau wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 13:32:37 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >What would be accomplished by its listening on 0.0.0.0? What would be the
> >downside of doing so?
>
>
> Seems to me that in a system with multiple mail servers, you could
> do a
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 06:05:47PM -0500, vernon wrote:
> Ever since going to Redhat 8.0 using Sendmail I am unable to send emails
> out. All of the emails going out are getting Deferred Connection; Timed Out.
> I am receiving emails just fine, just can't send them. I can also telnet
> from the
Worked pretty well, but munged up some of the headers. It wasn't accurate
enough to keep all the headers and formatting necessary for a good SA run,
though.
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
| Robert Strickler
| Sent: Wednesday, Octob
Hi all,
Could some explain this to me? Maybe I'm missing something obvious? I
can't find any reference to this in my whitelists, but the Status is No.
Thanks,
Riley
Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest.
-- Mark Twain
Reply-To: "Surf Faster
Got this spam today:
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from now1.hi-speedemail.net (now1.hi-speedemail.net [64.70.44.9])
by mycompaqserver.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g99N2Kg06176 for
; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 19:02:20 -0400
Received: from [10.0.1.21] by now1.hi-speedmediaoffers.com (10.0.
Can anyone tell me how I can list the contents of the auto-whitelist db in
some human-readable form?
Just curiosity!
Simon
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_
Yet another method, using cricket which IMHO is far better than MRTG.
http://www.sonic.net/~kgc/cricket/
Examples available at
URL: http://stats.sonic.net/public_cricket/grapher.cgi?target=%2Fservers%2Fspamcan
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 01:40:22PM -0700, Steve Thomas wrote:
> Yep. I've thought
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 04:59:37PM -0700, Jeremy Zawodny wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 03:43:18PM -0500, Frank Pineau wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 13:32:37 -0700, you wrote:
> >
> > >What would be accomplished by its listening on 0.0.0.0? What would be the
> > >downside of doing so?
> >
>
On Wed, 2002-10-09 at 19:48, Simon Matthews wrote:
> Can anyone tell me how I can list the contents of the auto-whitelist db in
> some human-readable form?
in the Distributed tarball, there is a tools directory, and there is a
check_whitelist tool.
LER
>
> Just curiosity!
>
> Simon
>
>
>
>
My whitelist has the following entry:
whitelist_from_rcvd *@whitney.pmail.biz whitney.pmail.biz
But this got tagged as spam:
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Oct 7
09:17:45 2002
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from indigo.sparklehouse.com (smtp.sparklehouse.com [192.168
All,
I've been working on a graphing solution for mimedefang logs. It occurred
to me that I could also parse and graph spamd logs...
So, here it is... graphdefang v0.4... now with spamd log support!
You can see some live sample charts at:
http://www.westover.org/~jpk/spam
You can download Gr
Note that whitelist_from_rcvd also specifies a mailserver, the mailserver
specified (whitney.pmail.biz) never appears in any of the Received:
headers, thus it is a non-match.
Of course, the IP of that server does appear:
whitney.pmail.biz has address 206.231.144.172
but a reverse lookup takes
I am getting hit with processor usage issues.I
have multiple hosting customers on a machine and it is really easy for Spamassassin daemon to just peg processor until the kernel
panics. Is there an easy way to moniter/control/throttle
this?
Well, your messages are missing complete headers, so it's hard to say what
the problem is. I'd suggest reading this bugzilla however, then examining
the complete message headers and look at what the return path is.
http://www.hughes-family.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1038
At 05:23 PM 10/9/200
Arie Slob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-10 02:36:27 +0200]:
> Got this spam today:
> [...]
> You May Be closer (maybe hours away) To 'Financial' 'Freedom'
> If you needed '$24,000' in 24 Hours
> 'Click' 'Here'
> [...]
> As you can see, several phrases are enclosed in ' '
Unfortunately that is also
> (Please feel free to forward this message to other possibly-interested
> parties.)
Some caveats (in decending order of concern):
1. These messages could end up being falsely (or incorrectly) reported
to Razor, DCC, Pyzor, etc. Certain RBLs too. I don't think the
results for these distr
Arie Slob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Got this spam today:
> [...]
> As you can see, several phrases are enclosed in ' '
It's bug 1002:
http://www.hughes-family.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1002
Dan
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by
> I am getting hit with processor usage issues.I have multiple hosting
> customers on a machine and it is really easy for Spamassassin daemon to
> just peg processor until the kernel panics. Is there an easy way to
> moniter/control/throttle this?
I think someone could help you with more informat
"Ralf G. R. Bergs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This French spam just came across the XFS for Linux ML:
Looks like a forged Amazon message, not the fault of bondedsender.
More like we need to improve our Received: header handling (not an
easy problem, but I've been looking at it).
> [...]
> So
Simon Lyall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm getting a few false positives and noticed that a common factor seems
> to be that the first component is "rtn" . The lists appear to be legit but
> they are getting picked up for NO_MX_FOR_FROM,
What version of SA?
They all have A records which is a
"Ralf G. R. Bergs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You should be able to use the "testing" version of that package without any
> problems. This is what I'm doing.
Well, not without upgrading other packages. I just built Duncan's
source package on my system, but next time I'll use his Woody packa
Hi comrades, and all those who fight against the evils that plague our
internet playground,
I've recently started playing with SpamAssassin and stumbled across
some limitations in the way vpopmail support is implemented. Vpopmail
(by default) creates domains within a system user account named
Current problem: Messages are not being tagged/proceessed by SpamAssassin
What is working: qmail-scanner is processing messages clamscan is
reviewing them.
perlscan is stopping messages as it should.
Spamd is running and Q-S knows it's there.
What I want: To dum
75 matches
Mail list logo
