On Sun, 18 Jan 2004, Matt Kettler wrote:
snip..
> 1) work with the RBL to get de-listed
>
> 2) change ISPs to move your IP to a different block.
>
> And that's about it.. The fact that SA notices that a source IP is listed,
> even though you use a legitimate mail relay, is NOT a bug. It's
> in
I'm getting really confused on all these custom rules...
There is a weeds.cf and a weeds_2.cf. Should I be running both of them or
is weeds_2.cf an updated version of weeds.cf?
--
Gerry
"The lyfe so short, the craft so long to learne" Chaucer
---
Sometimes after spamassassin does its thing I can't read the message.
Pine reports the following error:
"Error: Formatting Error: non-hexadecimal character in QP encoding"
What does this mean and is there a fix for it??
Gerry
--
"The lyfe so short, the craft so long to learne" Chaucer
_
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003, Greg Ennis wrote:
> Dear List Users,
>
> I need to install a site wide scanner for spam and viral packets of e-mail
> that will be resident for the server as well as e-mail packets that will be
> relayed to an internal server. Spamassassin is doing a great job of
> filtering
>>
>> Check out MailScanner. It works seamlessly with SpamAssassin and
>> supports
>> over a dozen virus scan engines.
>
> Check out mimedefang, easy to install via rpm, and supports multiple virus
> scanners.
> I would suggest clamscan as a good free scanner.
> ---
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Steve Thomas wrote:
>
> This may not be new, but it's the first one I've seen... It only scored 2.513 on my
> company's mail server which runs a CVS version of 2.60 from a couple months ago. The
> only tests it hit are NIGERIAN_BODY1 and US_DOLLARS. We're not using bayes he
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Bill Landry wrote:
> Well this makes it official, monkeys.com has regrettably thrown in the
> towel.
>
> Bill
That was a pretty classy note from the monkeys.com guy. It would have
been pretty easy for him to be really bitter.
I must admit I have some mixed emotions about
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Terry Milnes wrote:
> This may be a little difficult to explain but here goes.
>
> All of my systems are behind a nat box. My mail server OS is linux,
> using qmail/vpopmail/mysql procmail etc.etc..
>
> Upgraded to Spamassassin V 2.60 rc6 (the day before the final release)
> But you are missing the point, mail is being identified as
> RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK when it is the recipient who is in the dial up block,
> not the sender.
>
> The sender is on the rogers network using aloak smtp/pop3 servers,
> sending a message to a domain that is in the dial up block.
>
> The messa
> At 19:47 24/09/2003 -0400, Gerry Doris wrote:
>
>
>>SA 2.60 is giving a dynablock hit a wopping 2.62 score!!! It isn't
>> really
>>a problem that your SA is hitting this rule (you can always turn it off).
>>The real problem is that everyone else's S
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 12:10:59PM +1300, Simon Byrnand wrote:
> > Anyone agree/disagree with this ? The question is what to do about it,
>
> Well, all I can say is that it works pretty well for me.
2.50 has been picking off the Nigerian spams for m
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, D. Höhn wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I am using sedmail + sophos + MailScanner 4.12-2 + Spamassassin.
>
> While running on 2.44 everything was fine. I decided to upgrade to 2.50 only
> to find 768 files unscanned in the morning. I tracked things down like this.
>
> Using 2.50 the s
> This seems like it is about to become an accidental denial of service
attack
> on this mailing list. Might be a good idea to find a way of preventing
this
> before people who don't like SA catch on...
>
> Steve
Surely there's something the list manager can do to prevent spamming our
own list by
> I was looking to get spamassassin and an anti virus program, sophos,
> openantivirus, or anything that would work in conjunction with
> spamassassin as a mail gateway. I have a production mail server and I
> want to create just a SMTP relay to protect the production mail server
> and have spamass
I finally got around to installing pyzor. I can do a pyzor ping or
discover so it seems to be working. However, I haven't seen any sign that
spamassassin is using it.
I've run the sample-spam.txt through spamassassin and see dcc and razor2
checks but no mention of pyzor.
Did I need to do any
On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Martin Radford wrote:
> At Sun Aug 10 10:45:08 2003, Gareth wrote:
>
> > I'm using mbox, so I guess that wouldn't work for me... maybe I can just
> > empty the mbox file?
> >
> > /usr/bin/sa-learn --spam --mbox /var/spool/mail/spam
> > echo > /var/spool/mail/spam
> > /usr/bi
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 05:58:11PM -0500, dogface wrote:
> > from what i have read on this list
> > i would of expected nothing less than
> > the response i got from you.
>
> I'm confused. This mailing list is generally quite informative.
>
> > A. af
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Charles Gregory wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> > Send them to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I dug through my spam corpus and found
> > 8 so far this month and just sent them off. We'll see what happens.
>
> I agree on reporting them. But it should be obvious in
All this time I thought that there were evil minds at work finding ways to
generate bayes busting spam...
warning...this is politically uncorrect!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/28/34840.html
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perfor
> We're all seeing false negatives slip through from a spammer using the
> Habeaus header, but I don't think 0 is the right score for the test.
> I think it's still a valid negative score.
>
> Looking at my latest, if I give Habeas a -3.0, the false negative turns
> positive. So I'm going to try t
snip...
> That was our plan, keep the scores low, there are so many rules, you are
> likely to see an average of 5-15 hit on a spam message. This is still
> low
> but it's safe for testing. We've done lots of mass-checks against english
> ham and spam but we do not have access to any other lang
21 matches
Mail list logo
