Thomas Kinghorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have the domain in whitelist_from but the subject still gets
> re-written with ***SPAM.
>
>
> X-Spam-Flag: YES
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.43 (1.115.2.20-2002-10-15-exp)
> X-Spam-Report: 4.80 hits, 4.5 required;
> X-SA-Exim-Scann
Steve, et al --
...and then Steve Thomas said...
%
% | and there don't appear to be any extraneous spaces in there.
%
% There's a space after your e-mail address.
Oh! *blush* Thanks :-)
HAND
:-D
--
David T-G * There is too much animal courage in
(play) [EMAIL PROTECT
Okay, heres the problem.
whitelist_from whitelists the entire domain, right?
I need to whitelist a certain user from the domain.
whitelist_from_rcvd does not do this.
Any ideas???
Regards,
Tom Kinghorn
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored
Does anyone know if the problems with Razor Server have been
fixed? I would hate to take away the '-L' and start loosing
email again.
Thanks
Jim
Get your own "800" number
Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more
http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag
Is there a way to code for the freeze again... Say if this starts up
disable Razor? Kind of like the P, --paranoid option?
Jim
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tim
Treaster
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 11:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
S
On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 06:38:43 -0500
"James D. Stallings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Does anyone know if the problems with Razor Server have been
> fixed? I would hate to take away the '-L' and start loosing
> email again.
Uh, why would that make you lose mail? It sure doesnt for me.
---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I don't know if you've solved your problem yet, but I had, and am having the same
situation. I have a feeling I know what your problem is.
This happened once before when the Razor servers were having problems. Setting 'score
RAZOR_CHECK 0' *sh
All of my procmail processes would timeout with a Drained
message, then the email was returned as "service not available"
Thanks
Jim
Get your own "800" number
Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more
http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag
On Fri,
On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 08:29:55 -0500
"James D. Stallings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All of my procmail processes would timeout with a Drained
> message, then the email was returned as "service not available"
Well, that's more of a procmail problem than a spamd problem.
procmail should under su
Dear,
I used spamassassin quite a while without any troubles.
Yesterday I suddenly noticed that my mails are not filtered anymore.
(Missing X-Spam headers and of course SPAM in my inbox)
Inside the procmail.log I found for each mail:
-
procmail: Timeout, terminating "/usr/bin/spamassassin"
pr
> "TLS" == Tony L Svanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
VK> Never underestimate the need for confirmation records...
TLS> Never understimate the stupidity of some people...
TLS> Never underestimate the usefulness of adding a "this was sent to
TLS> [EMAIL PROTECTED]" at the top of mailings;
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 06:11:48AM -0600, Mike Loiterman wrote:
> This happened once before when the Razor servers were having problems. Setting
>'score RAZOR_CHECK 0' *should* fix your problem nicely -- until they fix the razor
>server. See my 'Razor Down' thread for additional info.
Just w
I've been doing some testing lately before I implement spamassassin here
site-wide. I've been extremely happy with the results so far. In my
testing, I was lucky enough to have a good chunk of our department
volunteer/ get suckered into testing it out for me. I set all of them up
with .procmailr
On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, Barry Jaspan wrote:
> Everyone, please calm down!
>
> The amount of confusion on this list is staggering. One very important
> point that many people seem to be missing:
>
> Network Associates did *not* buy SpamAssassin!
>
> NAI bought Deersoft, Inc. Deersoft develops and
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 09:50:59AM -0500, Mark T. Valites wrote:
> SPAM: Start SpamAssassin results
> --
> SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered
> SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. SPAM:
>
Just forgot to say, that the actual perl version is 5.6.1
--
Timm Riesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
I have a very large list of spammers' domains and netblocks as well as
pro-spam ISPs (like Broadwing). Just yesterday I was working on a script
to recombine multiple files into a full access list so I could move the
RELAY, OK, SPAMFRIEND, and my 553 Spammer's stick it lines into seperate
files. T
wrote on Thu, 9 Jan 2003 23:09:41 -0600 (CST):
> Any chance this script might be available?
>
it's available from spamassassin.org/devel/ and mentioned at least on
one page online and in the readme. Really ;-)
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services:
Bolero (Kai Maillists) wrote on Fri, 10 Jan 2003 00:40:52 +0100:
> > Razor Not SA : 1 (0.0 %)
> > Razor Cause SA: 87 (2.1 %)
>
So, if I interpret this correctly, it made a difference for only 2%
of the spam?
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet
wrote on Wed, 8 Jan 2003 20:29:26 -0800:
> i gather you are looking to reduce the cost of spam filtering,
> by cutting out inefficient or costly tests.
>
Absolutely, yes. Thanks for all answers. I think I just leave it now
as is, so not adding any dcc/razer/pyzor tests and also disabling the
d
Justin Mason wrote on Thu, 09 Jan 2003 12:04:42 +:
> > Hmmm... seems like osirusoft is up again.
>
> (In passing) don't count on it -- apparently it's running off a
> generator. :(
>
in addition, would like to note that relay.visi.com is down for about
two or three weeks now and will remain
On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 09:50:59AM -0500, Mark T. Valites wrote:
> > SPAM: Start SpamAssassin results
> > --
> > SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered
> > SPAM: so you can reco
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 04:31:54PM +0100, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> > > Razor Cause SA: 87 (2.1 %)
>
> So, if I interpret this correctly, it made a difference for only 2%
> of the spam?
Correct. 2.1% of the spam that was caught by SA wouldn't have been if
Razor wasn't installed.
--
Randomly
Hi,
I had Spamassassin 2.20 running on my Cobalt
RAQ3... unfortunately due to a series of... mishaps. it now hangs at
startup of spamd.
I thought I'd go for upgrading to either 2.43 or
2.50... but when I try using the 2.43 RPM file, the perl-spamassassin reports
the following missing d
I'm moving this over to satalk, because this is really not a question for
the saDev list since it has nothing to do with development and everything
to do with day-to-day system admin type knowledge.
If you want spamd to have it's own logfile, change the log facility using
spamd -s.. Find one of
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:34:11AM -0500, Mark T. Valites wrote:
> > This looks like an HTML mail with the body report enabled. This is
> > what happens when you do that (the body report isn't HTML, it's text,
> > so your browser/MUA munges the report). ;)
It could be. It also looks like what ha
Either whitelist_from or whitelist_from_rcvd can whitelist a single user,
or whole domain. In fact, both examples in my man
Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf are whitelistings of single users, not whole
domains. Read the manpage as well, but here's some examples:
whitelist_from just checks the from: li
On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:34:11AM -0500, Mark T. Valites wrote:
> > > This looks like an HTML mail with the body report enabled. This is
> > > what happens when you do that (the body report isn't HTML, it's text,
> > > so your browser/MUA munges the
Also check out http://webuserprefs.pipegrep.net
It's a PHP template for editing user_prefs files.
Patrick
Original Message
From: Kai Schaetzl
Date: Fri 1/10/03 10:52
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: [SAtalk] web interface?
wrote on Thu, 9 Jan
I apologize if this has been covered. I was unsubscribed from the list
and happily running spamassassin for quite some time and then recently I
started having problem.
I was running Razor1 and I wasn't able to connect to any servers. So,
basically, this added 10 seconds to process each message.
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 11:57:43AM -0500, Mark T. Valites wrote:
> I dropped 'use_terse_report = 0' into my personal user_prefs file, but it
> didn't seem to make any difference.
that's not the one that'll solve your problem. it's a combination of
the trifecta. See http://spamassassin.taint.org/
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:10:43AM -0700, Shane Hickey wrote:
> Is there a way to tell spamassassin not to use Razor1 in the local.cf
> file?
score RAZOR_CHECK 0
But you probably want to go remove the modules and scripts when you get the chance...
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Engineering d
I recently installed DCC and I'm getting this when I run spamd with the
-D flag.
debug: DCC is not available: dccproc not found
If I run "cdcc 'info'" I get the following
# 01/10/03 10:57:49 MST /var/dcc/map
# Will re-resolve names after 11:33:31
# 195.53 ms chosen delay 9 total addresses 5
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 11:00:59AM -0700, Shane Hickey wrote:
> I recently installed DCC and I'm getting this when I run spamd with the
> -D flag.
Is "dccproc" in PATH when you run spamd? Do you also have a recent Razor2 installed?
If the first answer is no, fix that. If the second answer is ye
On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 11:23, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Do you also have a recent Razor2 installed?
That was it. I set dcc_path in local.cf and it's rocking again.
Thanks,
Shane
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise E
wrote on Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:21:01 -0600:
> Also check out http://webuserprefs.pipegrep.net
>
> It's a PHP template for editing user_prefs files.
>
Ah, I think I misinterpreted his question, that's the one for files,
the other one requires MySQL I think.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, German
OK, SA newbie here with questions and concerns.
Any positive feedback and suggestions will be greatly appreciated!
Here is the configuration of the system that SA runs on:
SA 2.31 using spamc/spamd is invoked by Vpopmail/Qmail on a machine running RH 6.2 on a P3 600/256mb ram. Syste
Just wanted to add my report to the rest. I've been running
spamassassin for over a year and have never had anything like this
happen. Yesterday I looked in on a mail server that had stopped
responding to all attempts to contact it. Fortunately I had a
session already open to the machine. I
Maybe I'm missing something but where's the fnf.php? I have the header,
footer and index.php but there doesn't seem to be a fnf.php.
On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:21:01 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Also check out http://webuserprefs.pipegrep.net
>
> It's a PHP template for editing user_prefs fil
I don't know if anyone every saw my post, but
please if anyone has any ideas, suggestions, please help.
I'm getting the following error in my QMail
logs:
deferral:
spamc_returned_temporary_failure
Sincerely,
Abel Jeffcoat
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 12:17:47PM -0800, Robert Abatecola elucidated:
> Just wanted to add my report to the rest. I've been running
> spamassassin for over a year and have never had anything like this
Basically the scripts try to find to closest razor server, but if that
server is down, it is
This might be of some help:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-isp/2001/debian-isp-200110/msg4.html
That's a linux-kernel generated message and has to do with the VM subsystem
of the kernel failing under heavy memory load.
You might consider upgrading your version of SpamAssassin. I'm not sure
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 12:57:35PM -0800, Dale Harris wrote:
> Basically the scripts try to find to closest razor server, but if that
> server is down, it isn't smart enough to try another not so close. But
> continues to loop endlessly. No, I don't have a patch for it, I'm just
> passing on anot
Yeah, I didn't include a sample file. Try downloading again. There's a sample file in
there now.
Patrick
Original Message
From: Daemon
Date: Fri 1/10/03 14:28
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: [SAtalk] web interface?
Maybe I'm missing something
I have recently installed version 2.43 SA using spamd and have a couple of
questions. I tried to search the archives, but they went down just as I was
starting...
My local.cf settings are:
required_hits 5
version_tag mtvrules1 # append my info to the version
rewrite_subject 1 #
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 05:26:28PM -0500, Mike Vanecek wrote:
> (2) I turned on the rbl checks to see what would happen (I do not subscribe
> to any of them, individual user). How can I tell if spamd is actually
> checking the lists?
Look at the debug output from "spamassassin -D". It'll tell
Make test for 2.50 CVS has been failing for me, for the last few
days. Have others encountered this?
Freebsd 4.7, Perl 5.8.0
--Tomki
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
With SpamAssassin 2.43 I'm getting some obvious spam get in with
very large negative scores. I've attached two such messages; here are
their respective scores:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-281.6 required=5.0
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-174.7 required=5.0
Running "SpamAssassin -D" on the messag
have SA do a RBL lookup using hostname ?
I'd like to utilize the postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org,
abuse.rfc-ignorant.org, and dsn.rfc-ignorant.org zones, since many
of the spam messages I get seem to have MTA's that do not implement
postmaster abuse, or even recieve functionality...
any ideas?
thanks
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 07:10:00PM -0500, Greg Owen wrote:
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-281.6 required=5.0
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-174.7 required=5.0
>
> 1) Is this a known bug or known misconfiguration issue?
not a bug. these score above 20 for me with 2.43.
> 2) If so, how do I fix it?
Well
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 07:33:55PM -0500, John W. Reames wrote:
> have SA do a RBL lookup using hostname ?
> I'd like to utilize the postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org,
> abuse.rfc-ignorant.org, and dsn.rfc-ignorant.org zones, since many
> of the spam messages I get seem to have MTA's that do not implemen
Theo, please ignore my previous reply. Thank you for your help.
-- Original Message ---
From: Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Mike Vanecek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 17:56:35 -0500
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] New SA Install
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 05:26:28PM -0
>From SA configuration instructions:
[Quote]
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 spam in a foreign language.
Note th
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
Well, a quick look at the rule matches shows non-standard rules:
EBAY_REL_0,EBAY_REL_2,EBAY_REL_3
The rest are standard, so I'd assume these have large negative values.
Bingo! That large splat is the sound of egg on my face.
I checked all the scores in 50_scores.cf but
I had SA working fine and then linux misbehaved. I have SA running again,
but now when mail comes in it says test=none? It was working fine. How do
I get SA to run actual tests against the mail again?
Thank you.
Michael
---
This SF.NET em
Hi,
Sorry for the length. This is really irritating.
While testing the rfc-ignorant.org DNSBL lookups, I noticed a problem
with spamassassin not reliably reading $HOME/.spamassassin/user_prefs.
Permissions are ok:
-rw-r--r--1 apthorpe users3583 Jan 10 19:42
/home/apthorpe/.spamassas
> Here's a snip from the spamd debug output:
> Jan 8 23:19:36 mail spamd[4084]: debug: Razor1 is not available
> Jan 8 23:19:36 mail spamd[4084]: debug: Pyzor is available:
> /usr/bin/pyzor
> Jan 8 23:19:36 mail spamd[4084]: debug: entering helper-app run mode
> Jan 8 23:19:36 mail spamd[4084]:
Folks,
I have an odd one to report. I've been using SpamAssassin 2.20
(running as spamd) for months now without a problem. Last week, I
added a few whitelist_to and whitelist_from entries to
/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf, in this format:
whitelist_to *@todomain.com
Spamassassin seems to b
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 08:41:43PM -0800, M. Brownsworth wrote:
> Note that it does report "USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO," but it still doesn't
> add -100 to keep the score below the 5.0 threshold. Experimenting, I
Of course not, the score for USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO is -6.
> It added -100 to the score,
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 07:43:46PM -0600, Mike Vanecek wrote:
> This statement
> Which locales (country codes) are considered OK to receive mail from.
>
> seems to conflict with this statement
> If you wish SpamAssassin to block spam in foreign languages, set this to the
> locale which matches yo
Theo Van Dinter says:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 08:41:43PM -0800, M. Brownsworth wrote:
> Note that it does report "USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO," but it still doesn't
add -100 to keep the score below the 5.0 threshold. Experimenting, I
Of course not, the score for USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO is -6.
-6?
61 matches
Mail list logo
