Last week RBL slowness and outages impacted a few people on this list,
including us at FastMail.FM, where it resulted in a sizable mail queue
forming. Even reducing rbl_timeout pretty low wasn't enough of a solution
for us, because we still needed each message to go through in under a second.
T
On 2002-12-15 20:16:58 +0100, Klaus Heinz wrote:
> Martin Schroeder wrote:
>
> > header GENUINE_EBAY_DE_RCVD
>eval:check_for_from_domain_in_received_headers('ebay.de', 'true')
> > describe GENUINE_EBAY_DE_RCVD Message from eBay.de
> > tflags GENUINE_EBAY_DE_RCVD nice
> > score GENUINE_E
On Sunday, December 15, 2002, at 09:43 PM, G. Wayne Kidd wrote:
1) Give the user or the spam-reviewer a mechanism for adding the
sender to the whitelist.
Probably a web based configuration file editor is a good idea. I posted
a meager PHP-based
editor to the list a couple days ago.
2) If the
I thought I had this setup (SA, qmail, qmail-scanner, maildrop, etc) all
tested, but I'm finding in production mode, I'm several clues short :-/
First: running spamd, I can't seem to get it to recognize the
whitelist_from rule, either in local.cf or user_prefs (does user_prefs
even work with sp
Is there anyway to update your rules without doing a complete
upgrade?
Thanks!!
Get your own "800" number
Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more
http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag
---
This sf.net e
I'm getting the following error when I try to test SpamAssassin. I don't
have root access to this server and it is possible that I don't have access
to a directory I need. I do have permissions to run perl and other scripts.
%cd Mail-SpamAssassin-2.43
%../sausr/bin/spamassassin -t < sample-nonsp
Did you lint your config to make sure there's no typoes that are confusing SA?
Just run the command-line version to check your files for errors:
spamassassin --lint -D
and see if it complains about errors processing the config files. This has
bitten me in the back-end several times. Since SA is
I'm not able to duplicate this problem sending attachments from a shell
account, but customers are having problems with some attachments. For
some reason, it's pushing the hit threshold to 0 :
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=0 required=0
when there's an attachment instead of:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=
whitelisting in the local.cf file worked only after killing and restarting
spamd, even though changes to the hits threshold in the same config file
work after killing and restarting qmail-send.
I must be doing something seriously wrong here:
If spamd is killed, all email is rejected as spam with
On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 08:16:58PM +0100, Klaus Heinz wrote:
> Put it into some file in your site configuration (eg local.cf). SA 2.43
> has a bug (fixed in 2.50 as far as I know) which prevents 'header' rules
> in your user preferences from working.
Not fixed AFAIK.
--
Duncan Findlay
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 01:51:30PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> whitelisting in the local.cf file worked only after killing and restarting
> spamd, even though changes to the hits threshold in the same config file
> work after killing and restarting qmail-send.
>
> I must be doing somethin
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 01:16:31PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I'm not able to duplicate this problem sending attachments from a shell
> account, but customers are having problems with some attachments. For
> some reason, it's pushing the hit threshold to 0 :
>
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits
I have gotten a couple of vile spams that came through with NO problem
whatsoever because of the test "USER_IN_WHITELIST". It seems that the
spammer used my email address in the To: field as well as the From: field.
If all spammers did that, with my current configuration, my install of SA
wou
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 07:14:54PM -, Jonathan Duncan wrote:
> I have gotten a couple of vile spams that came through with NO problem
> whatsoever because of the test "USER_IN_WHITELIST". It seems that the
> would be worthless. Is there a way around this? Perhaps I could change the
> amo
On Mon, 16 Dec 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> I feel like I'm repeating my self now.
Sorry...maybe this should be in the FAQ.
> There's a bug in spamd in 2.43 that occurrs when spamc -c is used. You
> can find a patch in the bugzilla, somewhere, or in the CVS logs.
I found the "bleeding edge" CV
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 07:14:54PM -, Jonathan Duncan wrote:
> I have gotten a couple of vile spams that came through with NO problem
> whatsoever because of the test "USER_IN_WHITELIST". It seems that the
> spammer used my email address in the To: field as well as the From: field.
> If al
This may be a litte off topic, but does anyone know what path setting @INC is
looking at to find the paths in this error message? I need to find that path
setting and add some things to it.
-
Can't locate loadable object for module Time::HiRes
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 08:12:23PM -, Jonathan Duncan wrote:
> This may be a litte off topic, but does anyone know what path setting @INC is
> looking at to find the paths in this error message? I need to find that path
> setting and add some things to it.
It's in perl at compile-time (see
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 02:39:09PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Dec 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote:
>
> > I feel like I'm repeating my self now.
>
> Sorry...maybe this should be in the FAQ.
>
> > There's a bug in spamd in 2.43 that occurrs when spamc -c is used. You
> > can find a pa
some recommendations:
1) don't ever whitelist yourself. This kind of spammer behavior is SUPER
common. A very noticeable portion of the spam I get is "from" my own address.
2) If you must whitelist yourself, use a whitelist_from_rcvd not a simple
whitelist_from.
3) In fact, if you can avoid it
Hello,
I'm just starting to play around with spam assassin and I wanted to
teach it what my spam looks like. I can't find this tool anywhere. I
double checked with CPAN and according to them, Mail::SpamAssassin is up
to date.
Where would I normally find these tools. I have also noted that I do
Matt,
That makes a lot of sense. Thank you very much. I didn't see a
blacklist_from_rcvd in the config documentation so I assume there isn't one.
Similar precautions might be helpful, although it might be too much work to
try to match bad address to the servers they might be sending from. B
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 04:18:11PM -0600, Mike Carroll wrote:
> I'm just starting to play around with spam assassin and I wanted to
> teach it what my spam looks like. I can't find this tool anywhere. I
> double checked with CPAN and according to them, Mail::SpamAssassin is up
> to date.
sa-lear
On Mon, 16 Dec 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 02:39:09PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Dec 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> >
> > > I feel like I'm repeating my self now.
> >
> > Sorry...maybe this should be in the FAQ.
> >
> > > There's a bug in spamd in 2.43
On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > I'd look in the archives, but they seem to be down right now.
> >
> > Actually, I looked for the patch. It was applied before 2.43. You are
> > using 2.43, right?
>
> yes.
>
> > How are you calling spamassassin/spamc?
>
> It's being called from qm
Hi all,
I would love quick access to preferences via Web interface, but I don't
have access to the global .cf file on my ISP's server (DARN), so I can't use
MySQL to load rules. I'm assuming that the docs are very correct about only
being able to load rules from a db at a very privileged le
You're right, there's no blacklist_from_rcvd.. but do you really need/want
such precautions there?
I mean.. if I declare a from address to be blacklisted, do I really care
what server it came from? If a spammer forges a from address that is
blacklisted, more power to him... If an innocent bysta
Hi,
I was trying to configure
spam-assassin with procmail, and I find that although spamassassin marks the
spam mails correctly with SPAM in the subject line, procmail is not moving it
correctly to the spam folder - it continues to be in the inbox. Here's my
procmail recipe :
MAILDIR=/
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 04:37:41PM -0800, Somik Raha wrote:
> :0fw
> * < 256000
> | spamassassin
>
> :0:
> * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
>
> spam
You can't have a blank line there. And none of the other SA-related
rules will run since it's caught here.
> # Work around procmail bug: any output on stder
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 05:29:37PM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 04:18:11PM -0600, Mike Carroll wrote:
> > I'm just starting to play around with spam assassin and I wanted to
> > teach it what my spam looks like. I can't find this tool anywhere. I
> > double checked with
Hi Theo,
>> :0:
>> * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
>>
>> spam
>You can't have a blank line there. And none of the other SA-related
> rules will run since it's caught here.
Sorry, that was actually a typo on my part. There is no blank line in the
file.
>This isn't a complete rule.
>You may also want to
Hi Theo,
I just upgraded to v2.43 (I was using an older version that I picked up
from redhat.com), and this one works fine.
Thanks a lot.
Regards,
Somik
- Original Message -
From: "Somik Raha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Theo Van Dinter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Se
Duncan Findlay wrote:
> Not fixed AFAIK.
See PerMsgStatus::do_head_tests. In my (rather old) CVS copy from
2002-11-29 I found a test for $self->{conf}->{user_rules_to_compile}.
Putting that into SA 2.43 enabled header rules inside user preferences
again.
ciao
Klaus
-
Martin Schroeder wrote:
> Seems the rule is wrong anyway. How to catch something like this:
[ snipped sample mail ]
> eval:check_for_from_domain_in_received_headers('ebay.de', 'true') doesn't
> work (with --local). :-(
Did you search for 'ebay.de' in your mail? This string only occurred in
the
I'm in the process of dropping sendmail+procmail and switching to
exim 4. Since I am brand new at exim, I'm kind of flogging around
blindly.
Googling on "exim spamassasin" found me the proper router and
transport config settings (I've pasted them below), what's left is the
redirecting of high
Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-12-16 16:24:21 -0500]:
>
> 3) In fact, if you can avoid it, don't ever use a simple whitelist_from,
> and always use a whitelist_from_rcvd whenever possible. This closes a LOT
> of loopholes like the one you found here.
Hmm... Which version of SA supports
36 matches
Mail list logo
