[SAtalk] Re: Procmail+Sendmail+SpamAssassin

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 18:04:15 +0200, Peter Rosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted to the spamassassin-talk mailing list: > 2. retrieve the sender domain from Form: header What do you hope to gain by this? It is trivial to forge and usually does not have any connection to the actual sender of the spam. S

Re: [SAtalk] Disable FORGED_MUA_IMS tests

 -- Ursprungligt meddelande ---  Från: Martin Radford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Datum: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 20:27:55 + (GMT)  Ämne: Re: [SAtalk] Disable FORGED_MUA_IMS tests  At Tue Oct 28 06:30:43 2003, wilma wrote: >> >> Thanks everybody! I will use "score FORGED_MUA_IMS 0" in l

[SAtalk] Re: Re: All pdf attachments are defanged

>> Emails with a total attachment of less than 200k come through fine. Emails >> greater than 200k are corrupted. >Are you sure it's 200k and not 250k? >Look at spamc(1), option -s Yep, that was it. NT4 was reporting the file size at 200K, but setting a byte value with the -s solved it. Thanks

[SAtalk] SA2.6 on Mandrake 9.1

Hi, I'm hoping to get someone to help me out with intalling, config and understanding a bit more about SA on this same distro. If you use MDK9.1+qmail+qmail-scanner+SA2.6 and you have time to talk to me personally on ICQ, MSN or IRC. Please let me know, I need some help on this matter. Thanks in

[SAtalk] Call for suggestions: reducing side-effects of "hijacked" email address

Hi everyone, I'm looking for suggestions on how to reduce the side-effects of spammers using a real person's email address as From: address. Let me explain the issue: One of our customers is receiving approximately 1000 bounce messages per day for emails he didn't send. Spammers are using his add

[SAtalk] sendmail and spamassassin

Hi,   Thank you to tell me how to "link" sendmail" on Solaris to spamassassin. I don't have procmail on my mail server.   Thanks.

[SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code

I've added the popcorn, blackhair, and weeds rules a while back, but I've noticed that I'm still getting quite a few spams messages per day.  It always seems to be the most offensive porn and such that makes it through.   Here is an example of the source that get's through   NOT mature,

[SAtalk] How can I mark all mails with specific words in the subject as spam?

Hi list, I use SA on Suse 8.2. How can I setup blacklisting based on the mail subject? every mail containing specific words in the subject line should get + 10. Is there any way to do this in /etc/mail/spamassassin/mail.cf ? Or somewhere else? I want this as a site-wide setting. TIA Gerhard

Re: [SAtalk] Need help with configuration....

At 12:37 PM -0800 10/28/03, Patrick Morris wrote: Darryl Snover wrote: I've just re-made spamassassin, and now, running the spamassassin --lint results in the error: razor2 check skipped: No such file or directory Inescure dependency in connect while running with -T switch at /System/Library

Re: [SAtalk] Can I delete ham/spam email once I run sa-learn on them w/o impacting the database?

Abigail Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You DON'T want to refeed sa-learn the same email and you > don't want a file that is being used for sa-learn to grow > too large, for the following reason: Just to clarify: There's nothing horrible about refeeding the same e-mail occasionally. It's

RE: [SAtalk] sendmail and spamassassin

I use Sendmail with SA, but I do use procmail. Do you not have access to the ability to install packages on your server?   Otherwise, you’re going to have to use the Spamass milter, which means you’ve STILL got installation to do.   Without the ability to install stuff on your server,

Re: [SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code

Mark Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now, as you can see the trick here to fool spamassassin is the > and tags. I don't think that's what's fooling SA. SA strips all that stuff out before looking for phrases. The problem is the lack of phrases to trigger on. > Would it be possible to

[SAtalk] Spamassassin not rewriting the e-mail subject.

Hi everyone, I have a mail server with qmail-scanner and spamassassin. Spamassassin is installed system-wide. It is working, it detect spam, add the "X-Spam-Status" header in the email it process but it is not rewriting the e-mail subject. I have some error in the syslog about uninitiali

RE: [SAtalk] Auto-Learn

Are there other criteria, though? For example, I have set the threshold at which Auto-Learn is "triggered" for Spam at 7.99. Anything scoring over that is designated to be "auto-learned." Yet one came through this morning at 12.9, and it did NOT "auto-learn." However, Bayesian probability was so

Re: [SAtalk] Spamassassin not rewriting the e-mail subject.

At 09:15 AM 10/29/03 -0500, you wrote: Hi everyone, required_hits 8.0 rewrite_subject 1 fold_headers 1 report_header 1 use_terse_report 1 defang_mime 1 dns_available no dcc_add_header 1 use_dcc 1 One thing I can spot right away is that you need to remove the defang_mime statement from your local

RE: [SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code

Yes, this would be possible. describe MY_RBDY_EXSV_TAGMY: Excessive HTML Tags rawbody MY_RBDY_EXSV_TAG/<[bi]><\/[bi]>/i scoreMY_RBDY_EXSV_TAG4.0 Backhair did not hit because the number of characters within the tag is fewer than 6. Creating rules to match fewer than 6 characters

Re: [SAtalk] Need help with configuration....

Darryl Snover wrote: I've done the patch, and also re-installed everything, checking my steps carefully, watching for errors. I can now run the 'spamassassin --lint' without errors, and things like 'spamassassin -V' return as expected. However, still no success on actually running an email or

Re: [SAtalk] ISPS READ THIS: scanning outbound mail gotcha (fwd)

Dynablock should only be used to check the IP address delivering the email. Also of note to ISPs, SA users everywhere: If the machine you run SA on has a NATed or otherwise non-routable IP address (ie: 10.*.*.*, 192.168.*.*, etc) then you must manually set the trusted_relays in your local.cf. O

[SAtalk] 2004 Spam Conference

For those who don't already know: MIT Room 26-100 January 16, 2004, 9 am to 6 pm The 2003 spam conference worked well, so we plan to do much the same thing in 2004. There will be none of the cruft that usually accumulates on conferences; just a series of quick, concentrated talks, and then we a

Re: [SAtalk] Need help with configuration....

At 6:14 AM -0800 10/29/03, Patrick Morris wrote: Darryl Snover wrote: I've done the patch, and also re-installed everything, checking my steps carefully, watching for errors. I can now run the 'spamassassin --lint' without errors, and things like 'spamassassin -V' return as expected. However

[SAtalk] Whitelist vs. Blacklist

Greetings, Dumb question or a clarification (you choose): I have a blacklisted domain ([EMAIL PROTECTED]); however, there are one or two users at that domain who actually have legitimate reasons to send users of my mail servers mail (i.e. they belong to this list). If I globally whiteli

Re: [SAtalk] Can I delete ham/spam email once I run sa-learn on them w/o impacting the database?

Here is my approach then. Any difficulties you see? Here goes... I will turn autolearn off. >From a daily cron job I will: - first, move anything over a week old to a spam archive - and second, run sa-learn on my SPAM folder This will allow me to occasionally check for false positives and move

Re: [SAtalk] Spamassassin not rewriting the e-mail subject.

All right. I removed the "defang_mime 1" statement from the local.cf file than I ran "spamassassin --lint" got an error for the "report_header 1" statement so I removed it also so my local.cf file now looks like this : # This is the right place to customize your installation of SpamAssassin. #

RE: [SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code

Do you really think it would be a problem if we found more than 3 instances of in each email to mark it as spam? Maybe I could just score it lower per instance, say .2 There were 58 instances of in this email and 63 instances of . -Original Message- From: Larry Gilson [mailto:[EMAI

RE: [SAtalk] Spamassassin not rewriting the e-mail subject.

qmail-scanner.pl find the spamassassin binary line and remove the '-c' -Original Message- From: Daniel Poulin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:16 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [SAtalk] Spamassassin not rewriting the e-mail subject. Hi everyone, I ha

RE: [SAtalk] [RD] 4c-2v-3c

Hi Larry > I have had some very good success with a rawbody and subject test which > looks for > > 4 or more consonants > followed by 1 or 2 vowels > followed by 3 or more consonants or digits > > This is the match: > /[0-9bcdfghjklmnpqrstvwxz]{4,}[aeiouy]{1,2}[0-9bcdfghjklmnpqrstvwxz]{3,}

RE: Re[2]: [SAtalk] White & black lists on server

My e-mail provider told me where the user_prefs file was and told me to find SpamAssassin on the Web to find out how to do it. I had never edited anything on the web before, so I had to learn how to access and edit that file, which I did. I know they moved a SpamAssassin setting from 2 to 3

Re: [SAtalk] Spamassassin not rewriting the e-mail subject.

It worked ! Thanks to everybody who helped me to solve the problem. Have a nice day. Daniel P.S. Sorry for my bad english. Jason Staudenmayer wrote: qmail-scanner.pl find the spamassassin binary line and remove the '-c' -Original Message- From: Daniel Poulin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTEC

RE: [SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code

Something like this should work, although I am still learning so feel free to correct. rawbody T_OBFU_EMPTY_TAGS /<(i|b|u)><\/\1>/i score T_OBFU_EMPTY_TAGS 0.1 The intended result would be any HTML , or tag followed immediately by a closing tag, with no intervening characters. I did find a s

[SAtalk] testing/installation error

I'm trying to install SA 2.60 on a Debian woody system and I have the following problems (both using CPAN and the tarfile via make test): t/sha1..Use of inherited AUTOLOAD for non-method Digest::SHA1::sha1_hex() is deprecated at t/sha1.t line 34. Can't locate auto/Digest/SHA1/s

RE: [SAtalk] [RD] 4c-2v-3c

Hi Jennifer, > -Original Message- > From: Jennifer Wheeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:51 AM > To: 'Larry Gilson'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [SAtalk] [RD] 4c-2v-3c > > > Hi Larry > > > I have had some very good success with a rawbody and subje

Re: [SAtalk] testing/installation error

> "Fred" == Fred Marton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Fred> I'm trying to install SA 2.60 on a Debian woody system and I Fred> have the following problems (both using CPAN and the tarfile Fred> via make test): Fred> t/sha1..Use of inherited AUTOLOAD for F

RE: [SAtalk] How can I mark all mails with specific words in the subject as spam?

It isn't SA you want, it's procmail. The formail tool in the procmail package will do anything like this that you want. William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E. Polhemus Engineering Company Katy, Texas USA -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gerhard Hofm

RE: [SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Ritchie Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 7:14 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code I've added the popcorn, blackhair, and weeds rules a while back, but I've not

[SAtalk] wierd erroors

Hi all, I run this little script in a cron job once a night to learn and report spam. #!/bin/bash if [ -s ${HOME}/mail/spool/spam ]; then fetchmail -q cat ${HOME}/mail/spool/spam | formail -s spamassassin -l ${HOME}/public_html/spam -r cat /dev/null > ${HOME}/mail/spool/spam f

RE: [SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code

> > Do you really think it would be a problem if we found more > than 3 instances of in each email to mark it as spam? > Maybe I could just score it lower per instance, say .2 > > There were 58 instances of in this email and 63 > instances of . > A test that counted .1 per instance in a me

Re: [0.6] [SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Mark Ritchie wrote: > Now, as you can see the trick here to fool spamassassin is the and > tags. Would it be possible to make a rule or adjust the rules so > the scores high? There is nothing inbetween and I'd have to > say anyone sending messages like this is obviously a

Re: [SAtalk] wierd erroors

At 03:56 PM 10/29/03 +, you wrote: Since I upgraded I get mail from cron with numerous errors of this form in it. Insecure dependency in link while running with -T switch at /usr/share/perl5/Mail/SpamAssassin/NoMailAudit.pm line 452, line 136. Razor requires a source-code patch to work with S

Re: [SAtalk] [RD] 4c-2v-3c

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:50:37 -0500 "Jennifer Wheeler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Larry > > > I have had some very good success with a rawbody and subject test > which > > looks for > > > > 4 or more consonants > > followed by 1 or 2 vowels > > followed by 3 or more consonants or digit

RE: [SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code

> Yes, this would be possible. > > describe MY_RBDY_EXSV_TAGMY: Excessive HTML Tags > rawbody MY_RBDY_EXSV_TAG/<[bi]><\/[bi]>/i > scoreMY_RBDY_EXSV_TAG4.0 > > Backhair did not hit because the number of characters within the tag is > fewer than 6. Creating rules to match fewer

[SAtalk] Broken Rule

Hello, I was wondering if anyone could help me fix a broken rule. Im getting a error "Failed to compile body spamassassin tests, skipping: (syntax error at /ect/mail/spamassassin/local.cf, rule Porn, line 1, near "/) and "Failed to compile body spamassassin tests, skipping: (syntax error at /e

[SAtalk] SA-LEARN Actually Crashes System!

I am running SA 2.60 installed from the RPMs on Red Hat 9, on an AMD 2100+ based system with a half-gig of RAM.   This has now happened for the second time. Before when it happened, about two weeks ago, I figured it was just a coincidence. Now, I’m positive that it’s SA-LEARN that is the

RE: [SAtalk] [RD] 4c-2v-3c

> Do you really want to match punctuation and whitespace, > because both of those will match [^aeiouy]? Nope he doesn't... that was my big bad. Wasn't thinking. Thx Jennifer --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.

Re: [SAtalk] Broken Rule

Tobin wrote: Hello, I was wondering if anyone could help me fix a broken rule. Im getting a error "Failed to compile body spamassassin tests, skipping: (syntax error at /ect/mail/spamassassin/local.cf, rule Porn, line 1, near "/) Debugging a custom rule would be a lot easier if you showed us

RE: [0.6] [SAtalk] Exessive HTML Code

> > On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Mark Ritchie wrote: > > Now, as you can see the trick here to fool spamassassin is > the and > > tags. Would it be possible to make a rule or adjust > the rules so > > the scores high? There is nothing inbetween and I'd have to > > say anyone sending messages like

Re: [SAtalk] Broken Rule

On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 11:36:59AM -0500, Tobin wrote: > Hello, > > I was wondering if anyone could help me fix a broken rule. Im getting a > error > > "Failed to compile body spamassassin tests, skipping: > (syntax error at /ect/mail/spamassassin/local.cf, rule Porn, line 1, > near "/) > > and

Re: [SAtalk] testing/installation error

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 15:46:22 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Have you tried the debs from backports.org? They work fine for me. Great! Thanks. Only now, when I try to run spamd, I get: Could not create INET socket: Cannot assign requested address IO::Socket::INET: Cannot assign requested

[SAtalk] [RD] Excessive HTML tags --

I dug through my archived spam quarantines with the following search: egrep "<.><\/.>.{0,10}<.><\/.>.{0,10}<.><\/.>" -c /var/backup/spam* /var/backup/spam-030626:14 /var/backup/spam-030706:14 /var/backup/spam-030713:0 /var/backup/spam-030720:2 /var/backup/spam-030727:0 /var/backup/spam-030810:1 /

RE: [SAtalk] Spamassassin not rewriting the e-mail subject.

> From: Jason Staudenmayer > qmail-scanner.pl find the spamassassin binary line and remove the '-c' > I have the same problem but with sendmail using spamd (2.60): .../spamd -a -c -d -u nospam -H && echo -n ' spamd' my local.cf looks like this: # report_safe 1 # Add your own customisations to

Re: [SAtalk] testing/installation error

Fred Marton wrote: Great! Thanks. Only now, when I try to run spamd, I get: Could not create INET socket: Cannot assign requested address IO::Socket::INET: Cannot assign requested address Either it's already running, or something else is running on the port spamd wants. This message is i

Re: [SAtalk] Broken Rule

Sorry Im a newbie. I have attached my local.cf and my 20_compensate rule. Thanks again. (I have no custom rules) >>> Patrick Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10/29/2003 12:13:23 PM >>> Tobin wrote: >Hello, > >I was wondering if anyone could help me fix a broken rule. Im getting a >error > >"Failed

[SAtalk] Razor2 patch applied, still getting Bad file descriptor errors

Hello all, I've upgraded to SA 2.60, and I thought I'd followed the directions for applying the Razor2 patch included in the src. But apparently, I've not done everything correctly because I still get the: razor2 check skipped: Bad file descriptor Insecure dependency in connect while running set

RE: [SAtalk] Call for suggestions: reducing side-effects of "hija cked" email address

> > I'm looking for suggestions on how to reduce the side-effects of > spammers using a real person's email address as From: address. Let me > explain the issue: > > One of our customers is receiving approximately 1000 bounce > messages per > day for emails he didn't send. Spammers are using his

Re: [SAtalk] Broken Rule

At 11:36 AM 10/29/2003, Tobin wrote: I was wondering if anyone could help me fix a broken rule. Im getting a error "Failed to compile body spamassassin tests, skipping: (syntax error at /ect/mail/spamassassin/local.cf, rule Porn, line 1, near "/) Well, what's the broken rule look like? Can't exact

Re: [SAtalk] Broken Rule

On Wednesday 29 October 2003 6:02 pm, Tobin wrote: > Sorry Im a newbie. I have attached my local.cf and my 20_compensate > rule. Thanks again. (I have no custom rules) You have too many penises in your rules :) You have written: rawbody Porn- Penis /penis/ This should be:

RE: [SAtalk] Broken Rule

> Sorry Im a newbie. We are all a newbie in something dealing with computers :) I have attached my local.cf and my 20_compensate > rule. Thanks again. (I have no custom rules) Yes you do! "rawbodyPorn- Penis /penis/ describePorn- Penis

[SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

I have to change a rule and I want to do it nicely. So suggestions needed. The rule is : SUBJECT_XXX and in it, it has naughty words. One of which it looks for is : /pen.s/i Which was just trying to get past obfuscations. Well, anything that mentions: "Open source" in subject gets tagged as naught

Re: [SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

--On Wednesday, October 29, 2003 1:53 PM -0500 Chris Santerre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have to change a rule and I want to do it nicely. So suggestions needed. > The rule is : > SUBJECT_XXX > and in it, it has naughty words. One of which it looks for is : > /pen.s/i > Which was just tryin

Re: [SAtalk] SA-LEARN Actually Crashes System!

First of all, please don't post in HTML. Bill Polhemus was manually quoted as having said: > I am running SA 2.60 installed from the RPMs on Red Hat 9, on an AMD > 2100+ based system with a half-gig of RAM. Personally, I've avoided RH > 7.3 for server work- RH8 and RH9 have seen any number of rea

Re: [SAtalk] Broken Rule

At 01:02 PM 10/29/2003, you wrote: Sorry Im a newbie. I have attached my local.cf and my 20_compensate rule. Thanks again. (I have no custom rules) Well, you do have some attempts in there at making a custom rule.. and a very, very, very broken one. I'd delete the entire "Penis" rule you've got i

[SAtalk] Re: sendmail and spamassassin

Dominique Bagnato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thank you to tell me how to "link" sendmail" on Solaris to > spamassassin. I don't have procmail on my mail server. Why not? I can't imagine a good reason to have a mail server without procmail. -- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Re: [SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

On Wednesday 29 October 2003 6:53 pm, Chris Santerre wrote: > I have to change a rule and I want to do it nicely. So suggestions needed. > The rule is : > SUBJECT_XXX > and in it, it has naughty words. One of which it looks for is : > /pen.s/i > Which was just trying to get past obfuscations. Well

RE: [SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

> -Original Message- > From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > At 01:53 PM 10/29/2003, Chris Santerre wrote: > >SUBJECT_XXX > >and in it, it has naughty words. One of which it looks for is : > >/pen.s/i > > Rather than do the ^oO thing, why not modify your . to exclude spaces:

Re: [SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

At 01:53 PM 10/29/2003, Chris Santerre wrote: SUBJECT_XXX and in it, it has naughty words. One of which it looks for is : /pen.s/i Rather than do the ^oO thing, why not modify your . to exclude spaces: /pen\Ss/ This will look for a "non whitespace" in that spot. I'd also suggest putting a \b at

Re: [SAtalk] Call for suggestions: reducing side-effects of "hijacked" email address

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Fabian Fagerholm writes: >I'm looking for suggestions on how to solve the issue or to reduce the >amount of spam-bounces this user sees. The tools at my disposal are >SpamAssassin and Sieve filters. And, if it comes to that, a lawyer. Look at any mes

Re: [SAtalk] Re: sendmail and spamassassin

On Wednesday 29 October 2003 7:33 pm, Chris Barnes wrote: > Dominique Bagnato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thank you to tell me how to "link" sendmail" on Solaris to > > spamassassin. I don't have procmail on my mail server. > > Why not? I can't imagine a good reason to have a mail server witho

Re: [SAtalk] SA-LEARN Actually Crashes System!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bill Polhemus writes: > I am running SA 2.60 installed from the RPMs on Red Hat 9, on an AMD 2100+ > based system with a half-gig of RAM. Could you post the output of "rpm -qa"? And you're not using any hand-compiled components, it's all RPMs, right

Re: [SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

At Wed Oct 29 19:33:00 2003, Antony Stone wrote: > > Rather than focusing on what you *don't* want to catch with this > rule, how about concentrating on what you do want to catch? > > Obvious examples are covered by /pen[i1l]s/i - presumably not too > many things need adding to the middle regex t

Re: [SAtalk] SA-LEARN Actually Crashes System!

On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 11:58:35AM -0800, Justin Mason wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > > Bill Polhemus writes: > > I am running SA 2.60 installed from the RPMs on Red Hat 9, on an AMD 2100+ > > based system with a half-gig of RAM. > > Could you post the output of "rp

[SAtalk] grouping rules

Hi, Is there a way to group rules together for only certain instances? For example, I want score the porn rules higher on a certain domain.. so I guess I would need something like header DOMAIN From =~ /filtereddomain.com/i But is there a way I could then do something like score FREE_PORN 3.0 a

RE: [SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

> > Obvious examples are covered by /pen[i1l]s/i - presumably not > too many things > need adding to the middle regex to match the strings you're > interested in? > > Just a thought. > > Antony. > One would think that. But I had never heard of an "galiec i" or whatever the heck they were us

Re: [SAtalk] Re: SA loads & times

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check for lock files. There seems to be a 20 second timeout if (in my case, it was the whitelist lockfile) gets stale. Look for minutes/days old lockfiles, and clean them out. I had steady 29+second spamd times, turned off all lookup etc, nothing changed. Snooped in

[SAtalk] Rule for looking at envelope sender?

How can one look at the envelope sender of a message in a rule? Is there a variable available to SA for that? I'm trying to block messages from what I call the stderr spammer because they use hundreds of domain names and keep changing ISP's but the emails always use an envelope sender of [EMAIL P

[SAtalk] Question Re: SpamAssassin Port on FreeBSD 4.9

Hello I have installed SpamAssassin from the FreeBSD port (/usr/ports/mail/spamass-milter/) and it is generally working fine. I tried to set up SQL user preferences by adding the following to my /usr/local/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf file (which I know is the correct one because all the other

Re: [SAtalk] Auto-Learn

At Wed Oct 29 14:15:51 2003, Bill Polhemus wrote: > > Are there other criteria, though? > > For example, I have set the threshold at which Auto-Learn is > "triggered" for Spam at 7.99. Anything scoring over that is > designated to be "auto-learned." > > Yet one came through this morning at 12.9,

[SAtalk] Duplicate postings.

Okay, this is about the third or fourth copy of Chris' message. I'm pasting the full headers in case some list guru can tell from them where this message might have gotten duplicated. On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Chris Santerre wrote: > Return-Path: <> > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Received: fr

RE: [SAtalk] grouping rules

> > Is there a way to group rules together for only certain instances? > For example, I want score the porn rules higher on a certain domain.. > so I guess I would need something like > > header DOMAIN From =~ /filtereddomain.com/i > > But is there a way I could then do something like > score F

RE: [SAtalk] Duplicate postings.

> Okay, this is about the third or fourth copy of Chris' message. > I'm pasting the full headers in case some list guru can tell from them > where this message might have gotten duplicated. > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Chris Santerre wrote: *snip* I never write anything that important (-: Actual

Re: [-6.8] Re: [SAtalk] Call for suggestions: reducing side-effects of "hijacked" email address

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Justin Mason wrote: > Look at any message that matches various patterns for a DSN (Subject =~ > /undeliverable/, etc.). > If it does not contain the IP address of his network or outgoing relay, > drop it, it's a bounced forgery. Again, this works in *most* cases, but there are

RE: [SAtalk] Question Re: SpamAssassin Port on FreeBSD 4.9

spamassassin -D is your friend. Use it to show whether your SQL access is working or not. Once it is, spamd will probably work, or you can try spamd -D, and run spamc from a different window. - dan -- Dan Kohn -Original Messag

Re: [SAtalk] grouping rules

At 03:02 PM 10/29/2003, Joe wrote: Hi, Is there a way to group rules together for only certain instances? For example, I want score the porn rules higher on a certain domain.. so I guess I would need something like header DOMAIN From =~ /filtereddomain.com/i But is there a way I could then do s

[SAtalk] What on earth is this? FW: Undeliverable Mail: RE: [SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

I'm not sure if this is a Spam or legit! Anyone ever got one of these from the list? It was tagged as spam. I sent other messages to the list today, this is the first bounce I recieved.(Other then Kevin's mailbox being full!! By the way, his Phone number is on his site!) I'm thinking it is garbag

RE: [SAtalk] Rule for looking at envelope sender?

I can tell you how to pass the information to SA it if you use Postfix and Procmail. Otherwise, you will need to figure out how to make your MTA pass that information along to SA. You will also need a custom rule. MAIL FROM and RCPT TO data are not passed along as part of a message. --Larry

Re: [SAtalk] grouping rules

Check the link in my sig. There is a link to Matt's guide and the wiki. What you are looking for is called META rules. Thank you again.. would have never thought they would be called 'meta rules' :) --- Joe Topjian email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://zaven.us --

RE: [SAtalk] grouping rules

Hi Joe, I think you might want to look at Meta rules. http://www.merchantsoverseas.com/wwwroot/gorilla/sa_rules.htm http://www.exit0.us/ http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mkettler/sa/SA-rules-howto.txt --Larry > -Original Message- > From: Joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesda

[SAtalk] report vs check with spamd/spamc

i searched the archives for an answer, but may have missed it. please excuse me if i'm brining up an already answered question. i have recently ditched the perl api in favor of the spamd/spamc combination for our mail system. one of the advantages of the previous setup was that i could easily choo

[SAtalk] Re: Re: sendmail and spamassassin

Antony Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.mailscanner.info will link sendmail with spamassassin > without using procmail, gives great flexibility in the configuration > rules, and allows good integration of anti-virus products at the same > time. I think this may have just answered a qu

Re: [0.0] RE: [SAtalk] Duplicate postings.

Hi Chris! Okay, here we go again. Three copies of the mail: Direct from your server to mine. Direct from sourceforge list server to mine. Plus the unexpected third copy: Routed from sourceforge through force9.co.uk then to me. I'm CC'ing this to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and the force9.co.uk pos

Re: [2.2] [SAtalk] What on earth is this? FW: Undeliverable Mail: RE: [SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Chris Santerre wrote: > I'm not sure if this is a Spam or legit! Anyone ever got one of these from > the list? I got one of these too. I think a list subscriber has a broken 'bounce' mechanism, or their domain just cavved, but the message did not provide any details on whose

[SAtalk] Problem with SpamAssassin + Vpopmail + Procmail + Qmail

Hello, it is since yesterday that i try and try, but i cannot solve it! I am running QMail + Vpopmail on Linux; i have created a .qmail-default file like this: |/var/qmail/bin/preline /usr/bin/procmail -p -m /var/vpopmail/domains/.procmailrc and a .procmailrc file like this: VERBOSE=on LOGFILE

[SAtalk] SA2.6 on Mandrake 9.1

Hi, I'm hoping to get someone to help me out with intalling, config and understanding a bit more about SA on this same distro. If you use MDK9.1+qmail+qmail-scanner+SA2.6 and you have time to talk to me personally on ICQ, MSN or IRC. Please let me know, I need some help on this matter. Thanks in

RE: [SAtalk] What on earth is this? FW: Undeliverable Mail: RE: [SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

Definitely SPAM, and of a particularly nasty sort. Somehow someone is snagging emails off the archive or some other way, and fabricating these replies. Bad business. William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E. Polhemus Engineering Company Katy, Texas USA -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mai

Re: [SAtalk] Rule for looking at envelope sender?

At 03:40 PM 10/29/2003, David Hubbard wrote: How can one look at the envelope sender of a message in a rule? Is there a variable available to SA for that? That's fundamentally impossible in SpamAssassin.. SA isn't provided the envelope. The only way SA can know about the envelope is if you have

Re: [SAtalk] Auto-Learn

On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 12:13:03PM -0600, Bill Polhemus wrote: > How can I know for sure if Auto-Learn is functioning correctly? Run with -D. it'll tell you if it's doing autolearning. -- Randomly Generated Tagline: Son, this is the only time I'm ever gonna say this. It is not okay to lose.

Re: [SAtalk] Duplicate postings. (clarification)

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 16:32:41 -0500 (EST) Charles Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Chris Santerre wrote: > > Actually, I'm sorry Charles. You may have gotten 4 copies from me! > > I tried to take that into account. Including your 'direct' replies, the > count is actually u

Re: [SAtalk] What on earth is this? FW: Undeliverable Mail: RE: [SAtalk] [RD] Open source is Naughty!!!

Chris Santerre wrote: I'm not sure if this is a Spam or legit! Anyone ever got one of these from the list? A bounce message from someone whose susbcribed e-mail address is no longer valid? Sure, I see them all the time. This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above

[SAtalk] Duplicate postings. (clarification)

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Chris Santerre wrote: > Actually, I'm sorry Charles. You may have gotten 4 copies from me! I tried to take that into account. Including your 'direct' replies, the count is actually up to 5 or 6. The interesting thing, if you look at those headers is that there are about 4 or 5

RE: [SAtalk] Duplicate postings. (clarification)

Charles Gregory Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 4:33 PM > Just at a rough guess, I would say that whoever resides on or near > [EMAIL PROTECTED] or 'force9.net' has > something strange in their mail handling that is re-mailing articles? Per my post just the other day, I have been receiving man

RE: [SAtalk] Rule for looking at envelope sender?

> -Original Message- > From: David Hubbard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 2:41 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SAtalk] Rule for looking at envelope sender? > > > How can one look at the envelope sender of a message > in a rule? Is there a variable a

[SAtalk] "Failed to run BAYES_NN SpamAssassin test, skipping" problems

Hi - I'm new to the list, because I've just run into my first (known) problem with SpamAssassin: I'm running SpamAssassin 2.60 on a Solaris 7 system integrated with Courier 0.42.2. Everything's been more or less peachy, but starting about a week ago, all of a sudden I've been getting the followin

  1   2   >