> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 5:14 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RBL Misfires?
>
>
> It would be useful if you could forward the messages that falsely
> trigger on RBLs, along with name resoluti
On Wednesday, October 13, 2004, 12:39:24 PM, Jerry Jerry wrote:
> Does anyone have a good list of RBL's they use that blocks majority of the
> spam?
> Thanks
Kelson is right, please see the previous threads about this.
This subject's not entirely on topic either, at least for
using RBLs at the M
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Is there maybe a way to work around it using
su -c "spamd -L -x -d -m 10" spamc
? Or does that stop binding, or children from propagating?
Hi,
That won't work since non-root users can't bind to ports below 1024.
What about
su -c "spamd -L -x -d -m
On Wednesday, October 13, 2004, 10:13:53 AM, Christopher Candreva wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Chris Santerre wrote:
>> I would like to know if anyone gets a report of spam that has this domain in
>> it. They just make me feel all icky. The more I read their site, the more I
> Icky ? The biggest
Ernie Dunbar wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ernie Dunbar wrote:
I'm running Spamassassin v3.0.0 on FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE, and I
run spamd like this:
/usr/local/bin/spamd -A 127.0.0.1 -L -x -u spamc -d -m 10
Perhaps the -A and -u flags are mutually exclusive? Maybe binding to a
particular
interf
> Rick Macdougall wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Ernie Dunbar wrote:
>>> /usr/local/bin/spamd -A 127.0.0.1 -L -x -u spamc -d -m 10
>> The spamd children start out as the correct user
>> but over time (I'm assuming when max-connections are hit) the newly
>> spawned children are run as root
Rick Macdougall wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Ernie Dunbar wrote:
>> /usr/local/bin/spamd -A 127.0.0.1 -L -x -u spamc -d -m 10
> The spamd children start out as the correct user
> but over time (I'm assuming when max-connections are hit) the newly
> spawned children are run as root instead
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Ernie Dunbar wrote:
>>
>>>I'm running Spamassassin v3.0.0 on FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE, and I
>>>run spamd like this:
>>>
>>>/usr/local/bin/spamd -A 127.0.0.1 -L -x -u spamc -d -m 10
>>
>>
>> Perhaps the -A and -u flags are mutually exclusive? Maybe binding to a
>> particu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ernie Dunbar wrote:
I'm running Spamassassin v3.0.0 on FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE, and I
run spamd like this:
/usr/local/bin/spamd -A 127.0.0.1 -L -x -u spamc -d -m 10
Perhaps the -A and -u flags are mutually exclusive? Maybe binding to a particular interface is a root-only kin
On Oct 13, 2004, at 12:39 PM, Jerry wrote:
Does anyone have a good list of RBL's they use that blocks majority of
the spam?
I happen to like the SBL and XBL. Both as SMTP blocks and as Spam
Assassin checks.
In SA, I tend to set all other RBL's to scores of 0 (to skip them), and
set the SBL an
Ernie Dunbar wrote:
> I'm running Spamassassin v3.0.0 on FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE, and I
> run spamd like this:
>
> /usr/local/bin/spamd -A 127.0.0.1 -L -x -u spamc -d -m 10
Perhaps the -A and -u flags are mutually exclusive? Maybe binding to a
particular interface is a root-only kind of thing. I b
Ernie Dunbar wrote:
I'm running Spamassassin v3.0.0 on FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE, and I run spamd like
this:
/usr/local/bin/spamd -A 127.0.0.1 -L -x -u spamc -d -m 10
When I use `ps aux |grep spamd` I get this:
spamc 61970 0.5 3.9 21292 20032 ?? Is3:04PM 0:00.47
/usr/local/bin/spamd -A 1
I'm running Spamassassin v3.0.0 on FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE, and I run spamd like
this:
/usr/local/bin/spamd -A 127.0.0.1 -L -x -u spamc -d -m 10
When I use `ps aux |grep spamd` I get this:
spamc 61970 0.5 3.9 21292 20032 ?? Is3:04PM 0:00.47
/usr/local/bin/spamd -A 127.0.0.1 -L -x -u
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 04:30 PM 10/13/2004, scohen wrote:
> Your error is in the bayes_auto_learn line.. you need to specify a 1 or a 0
> after it.
>
Thanks! I can't believe I missed that.
Steve Cohen
Jerry wrote:
> Does anyone have a good list of RBL's they use that blocks majority of
> the spam?
This comes up every few months (which is OK - spam changes, and so
various lists' effectiveness changes), but the most recent thread was
just two weeks ago. Check out the "Preferred DNSBL" thread:
Does anyone have a good list of RBL's they use that
blocks majority of the spam?
Thanks
> One of the things I have found says to run
> spamassassin -D --lint when adding new rule sets.
Unless it is the first time for the installation or things have gone very
wacky, simply --lint is sufficient when adding a new rule set most all the
time. If you have put it in the right place (and yo
> > Part 2:
> >
> > The second solution would be to set postfix to reject a message if the
> > header contains “Spam Score 15”, “Spam Score 16”, “Spam Score 17” ect.
In procmail a standard trick is to look at the line of asterisks, which is
one per point.
So if you have 15 or more asterisks in a r
At 04:30 PM 10/13/2004, scohen wrote:
I understand that you are supposed to change the rewrite subject line to
rewrite_header, which I did. My local.cf file is below
#rewrite_subject 0
#report_safe 1
rewrite_header Subject SPAM(_SCORE_)
use_bayes 1
bayes_auto_learn
bayes_path /var/spool/MIM
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 04:30:41PM -0400, scohen wrote:
> bayes_auto_learn
That line is the problem, you need a 1 or 0 (zero) there.
Michael
I had this issue before where I got an error like this:
"Argument "" isn't numeric in addition (+) at
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf/Parser.pm line 572."
I understand that you are supposed to change the rewrite subject line to
rewrite_header, which I did. My local.cf file i
At 02:58 PM 10/13/2004, Ronald I. Nutter wrote:
I have just reinstalled SA on a new server with more processor and more
memory that the "test" system I started out with that ended up in
production. I am looking at adding some additional rules as I get more
experience with this. One of the things
Quoting Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I assume you've got some bayes_path statement in your local.cf forcing SA
> to use that path. Note: if it's set to /root/* I'd suggest changing it to
> /var/amavis/*, unless you want to make root's homedir world-readable.
I do not set bayes_path in loca
I have just reinstalled SA on a new server with more processor and more
memory that the "test" system I started out with that ended up in
production. I am looking at adding some additional rules as I get more
experience with this. One of the things I have found says to run
spamassassin -D --lint
Kevin Peuhkurinen said:
>
> J Thomas Hancock wrote:
>
>> I apologize for the questions, but this is how my Boss wants things
>> done and who am I to argue with him. I figure he will listen to me
>> better if I have a creditable source, the SpamAssassin mailing list,
>> backing me up versus me by my
Robin Lynn Frank wrote:
> I have a very strict rule. Any website that features a picture of the
> owner is regarded as worthless.
www.johnkerry.com
www.georgewbush.com
Hmmm... after reading the spin on both sites, you're probably right! :)
Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.96
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 13:13:53 -0400 (EDT)
"Christopher X. Candreva" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Chris Santerre wrote:
>
> > I would like to know if anyone gets a report of spam that has this
> > domain in it. They just make me feel all icky. The more I read their
> > site,
J Thomas Hancock wrote:
I apologize for the questions, but this is how my Boss wants things
done and who am I to argue with him. I figure he will listen to me
better if I have a creditable source, the SpamAssassin mailing list,
backing me up versus me by myself.
Part 1:
My boss is convinced tha
J Thomas Hancock wrote:
> Part 1:
>
> My boss is convinced that SpamAssassin can delete an email if it
> crosses a certain hit threshold. Everything I have read states that
> SpamAssassin can only add a flag to the message (be it a subject
> rewrite, something in the header, ect) and that the MTA,
Hey,
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 12:10:59 -0500, J Thomas Hancock wrote:
JTH>[...]
JTH> What are the thoughts of the members of this list? Does anyone
JTH> have any other suggestions besides MailScanner and our two
JTH> solutions?
Try amavisd-new. It integrates perfectly into the postfix mail system,
*
J Thomas Hancock wrote:
I apologize for the questions, but this is how my Boss wants things
done and who am I to argue with him. I figure he will listen to me
better if I have a creditable source, the SpamAssassin mailing list,
backing me up versus me by myself.
Part 1:
My boss is convinced th
J Thomas Hancock wrote:
I apologize for the questions, but this is how my Boss wants things done
and who am I to argue with him. I figure he will listen to me better if
I have a creditable source, the SpamAssassin mailing list, backing me up
versus me by myself.
Part 1:
My boss is convinced
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Chris Santerre wrote:
> I would like to know if anyone gets a report of spam that has this domain in
> it. They just make me feel all icky. The more I read their site, the more I
Icky ? The biggest reason I think this is a scam is -- he obviously hasn't
read his own book.
I apologize for the questions, but this is how my Boss wants
things done and who am I to argue with him. I figure he will listen to me
better if I have a creditable source, the SpamAssassin mailing list, backing me
up versus me by myself.
Part 1:
My boss is convinced that SpamAssassin
>-Original Message-
>From: Brett Romero [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 11:15 AM
>To: Chris Santerre; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: What Missing Subject?
>
>
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Chris Santerre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "'Matt Kettler'" <
Exactly. Sometimes you have nothing to go on but the 'feeling' that you are
being fed a load of horse crap. Even some of the people who always cry for
whitlisting on SURBL felt a little fishy about this one. So we give the
benefit of the doubt for the first time. But if we find you did feed us a
lo
And Chris, if they do spam, we need to crucify them this time. Not just
the domain, let's do a lookup of every domain the company owns and add
them as well...
Matthew,
It's not a morality thing! It's just we're tired of being spammed by
shady people.
> -Original Message-
> From: C
Matt Kettler wrote:
At 12:55 AM 10/13/2004 -0700, Chris Weiss wrote:
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping:
rewrite_subject 1
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping:
use_terse_report 0
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: auto_learn
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 11:52 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: [ot] If you see this domain in spam
>
>
>Chris Santerre wrote:
>> Which is exactly why I'm asking for a spam that contains this. How
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 11:25 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: [ot] If you see this domain in spam
>
>
>Chris Santerre wrote:
>> I need a shower after we removed this domain
Chris Santerre wrote:
> I need a shower after we removed this domain from SURBL:
> hypnoticsellingsecrets.com
>
> I would like to know if anyone gets a report of spam that has this
> domain in it. They just make me feel all icky. The more I read their
> site, the more I wished we didn't remove the
Matt san, thanks a lot!
Your detailed description made my question clear.
From: Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AWL questions (faq?)
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 20:22:32 -0400
> At 08:25 AM 10/13/2004 +0900, MATSUDA Yoh-ichi wrote:
> >(1) How to monitor AWL registered listings?
> > I
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Santerre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Matt Kettler'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Brett Romero"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 10:46 AM
Subject: RE: What Missing Subject?
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler
Chris wrote:
> Matt, I take it theres no check_whitelist in the cpan installed
> version of 2.63? At least I can't find it. I did find
> check_whitelist from the old 2.41 version I installed via Mandrake
> RPM a while back.
It's always been included in the tarball so far as I recall; whether it
I need a shower after we removed this domain from SURBL:
hypnoticsellingsecrets.com
I would like to know if anyone gets a report of spam that has this domain in
it. They just make me feel all icky. The more I read their site, the more I
wished we didn't remove them. But...I need a spam.
Thanks.
>-Original Message-
>From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 6:10 PM
>To: Brett Romero; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: What Missing Subject?
>
>
>At 05:37 PM 10/12/2004, Brett Romero wrote:
>>What is this test:
>> MISSING_SUBJECT 1.40 Missing S
You could also use mangled:
http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/mangled.cf
~Jeff
On Oct 13, 2004, at 9:33 AM, Chris Frederick wrote:
Hello everyone,
I was wondering if SA had a rule or score that you could define a
specific word to look for. I don't get a lot of spam mail and SA has
been workin
>-Original Message-
>From: jdow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 6:39 PM
>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: Re: feeding frenzy for ws.surbl.org!!!
>
>
>From: "martin f krafft" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>also sprach jdow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.10.12.1158
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:33:06 -0500, Chris Frederick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello everyone,
>
>I was wondering if SA had a rule or score that you could define a
>specific word to look for. I don't get a lot of spam mail and SA has
>been working well so far, but I've been getting a few loan
Check out chicken pox.
Additionally you can look at http://www.rulesemporium.com/ for
updated/custom rules
~Jeff
On Oct 13, 2004, at 9:33 AM, Chris Frederick wrote:
Hello everyone,
I was wondering if SA had a rule or score that you could define a
specific word to look for. I don't get a lot of
Hello everyone,
I was wondering if SA had a rule or score that you could define a
specific word to look for. I don't get a lot of spam mail and SA has
been working well so far, but I've been getting a few loan apps lately.
They don't get any hits at all:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required
>-Original Message-
>From: Alan Munday [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 8:11 PM
>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: [OT] Spammer behaviour
>
>
>
>I'm in the process of building a couple of new servers and to
>run some test
>mail through, put one of them
>
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:58:43 -0500, Dallas L. Engelken
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > John, if you need expiry right now, you can use my patch on
> bug 3802
> > if you want. It will basically do what Michael is talking about
> > except for purging count=1 entries.
> >
> > http://bugzil
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:58:43 -0500, Dallas L. Engelken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> John, if you need expiry right now, you can use my patch on bug 3802 if
> you want. It will basically do what Michael is talking about except for
> purging count=1 entries.
>
> http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/sh
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:04:49 -0500, Michael Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How odd, I was just writing a blurb about this in my ApacheCon
> presentation. In the future, AWL will have some sort of expiration,
> in the mean time, with SQL, I've had great success with a lastupdate
> of type TIME
Dear Listers,
I'm having problems with spamd. It does not add any information to the
header.
I'm running version 3.0.0 of SA. I'm using a global procmailrc file. Further
am I running a Postfix mailserver and my distro is the SuSE Server.
/*
SENDER=$1
SHIFT=1
# Until now, mail is untag
yeah - just noticed that a handful of mails were accepted( all from same
address mind u)
we had very little manual config in previous version in
/etc/mail/spamassassin
Is there anywhere else i should be looking as I am only running in
sitewide mode.
am starting spamd as follows
/usr/local/bin
> -Original Message-
> From: Ronan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 11:32 AM
> To: spam
> Subject: upgrade not going to plan
>
>
> Just completed an upgrade to v3.0 from 2.63.
> SA not accepting *any* external connections on the one mailhub i
> upgraded on.
Just completed an upgrade to v3.0 from 2.63.
SA not accepting *any* external connections on the one mailhub i
upgraded on.
The other 2 hubs are running fine but still using 2.63.
all hubs are solaris sun boxes.
Is there any configuration changes needed for version3 cause i havent
seen any refern
On 10/13/2004 12:41 AM +0200, Rick Macdougall wrote:
Hi,
I'm running spamd on it's own server with the following command line
(under daemontools)
exec /usr/local/bin/spamd -q -x -m 10 --max-conn-per-child=20 -i
206.123.6.18 -A 206.123.6.19,206.123.6.18,216.162.64.120 -u Spamd 2>&1
Try this as yo
On 10/12/2004 10:22 PM +0200, Brett Romero wrote:
I sent the following message through SA 3.0 on Windows.
[SNIP HTML]
The following were returned:
UPPERCASE_25_50 0.10 message body is 25-50% uppercase
MISSING_SUBJECT 1.40 Missing Subject: header ALL_TRUSTED -2.80 Did
not pass throu
At 12:55 AM 10/13/2004 -0700, Chris Weiss wrote:
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: rewrite_subject 1
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: use_terse_report 0
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: auto_learn 1
debug: config: SpamA
Matt Kettler wrote:
At 12:25 AM 10/13/2004 -0700, Chris Weiss wrote:
I've tried completely deleting and re-creating the bayes databases
(using sa-learn clear followed by sa-learn on my various mailboxes),
but am still getting the errors. I also made sure I'd installed
DB_file (I'd read somewher
At 12:25 AM 10/13/2004 -0700, Chris Weiss wrote:
I've tried completely deleting and re-creating the bayes databases (using
sa-learn clear followed by sa-learn on my various mailboxes), but am still
getting the errors. I also made sure I'd installed DB_file (I'd read
somewhere it was needed). Any
At 11:37 PM 10/12/2004 -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote:
I googled for the error but cannot find a proper solution. Right now,
/root/.spamassassin is a symlink to /var/amavis/.spamassassin; the files
therein (i.e. the bayes_* files) are chown'd vscan:vscan. They are
updated when SA *itself* notices s
I'm using SA in the environment described by Scott Vintinner at
http://www.flakshack.com/anti-spam/ (Fairly-Secure Anti-SPAM Gateway
Using OpenBSD, Postfix, Amavisd-new, SpamAssassin, Razor and DCC).
Things had been running smoothly until I recent upgraded from v2.6 to
3.0. The upgrade went wel
also sprach M.Lucas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.10.13.0847 +0200]:
> send an empty email from your 2nd,3th,.. email address to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and you will only be allowed to post and you don't get any mail to this
> address
Great. I did search for this, i promise. ezmlm.org does not have it
On Tue, 2004-10-12 at 09:26, martin f krafft wrote:
> 1. ezmlm provides no NOMAIL feature. Many people use different
> email addresses to read and post, or post from multiple email
> addresses. I, for one, receive my list mail at an address
> created specifically for this list (I
What is likely happening is that sa-learn is running as root, with
nobody's permissions since apache su's itself to nobody by default on RH
9/FC1 (I am assuming this version of linux from the LC_ALL/LANG issue,
although mac osx is a possibility). When you click the link in horde, it
is executin
>
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 09:31:28PM -0400, Jason Frisvold wrote:
> > Is there any accepted method for expiring AWL entries? I'm
> currently
> > using the SQL implementation of AWL.
> >
> > If there was no accepted method, my plan was to add a
> TIMESTAMP field
> > to the database and expi
I understand my problem might be rooted in Horde, amavisd-new, or
Postfix. However, I want to be sure it's not a fundamental
misunderstanding (on my part) of how SA should be setup.
Postfix filters mail via amavisd-new (which calls SA). Everything runs
smoothly except the "Report as Spam" lin
hi
my qmail server only acts as the spam/av gateway server to our internal
MS server(s).
i need to allow users, with mail accounts on our internal server(s), to
access the whitelist/blacklist functions of spamassassin but without
seeing the entire list, i'm only interested in allowing them to a
LOL, oh please let me know how that conversation went!
"Uh...yeah..hello. Is this Tanya? You actually exhist? Ok, thanks. *click*"
I bet she slept well that night!
I got voicemail. :P Good thing about Vonage, you don't get long distance
charges. 6 pack of Pyramid Ale offerings, and I'll call anyo
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 09:31:28PM -0400, Jason Frisvold wrote:
> Is there any accepted method for expiring AWL entries? I'm currently
> using the SQL implementation of AWL.
>
> If there was no accepted method, my plan was to add a TIMESTAMP field
> to the database and expire old records...
>
H
> When I configure SpamAssassin to modify the subject of spam, the headers
break
> up in 2 pieces...up to and including the Subject header remain headers.
All
> headers after the Subject header move to the body/message part of the
mail!
Some people seem to be seeing this, others aren't.
I wonder
Is there any accepted method for expiring AWL entries? I'm currently
using the SQL implementation of AWL.
If there was no accepted method, my plan was to add a TIMESTAMP field
to the database and expire old records...
Thanks!
--
Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 12 October 2004 07:22 pm, Matt Kettler wrote:
> If you look in the tools subdirectory of the tarball distribution,
> there's a tool called check_whitelist. Feed it an AWL database file (look
> in ~/.spamassassin for it) and it will dump the contents in
> human-readable text.
>
Matt, I t
At 08:25 AM 10/13/2004 +0900, MATSUDA Yoh-ichi wrote:
(1) How to monitor AWL registered listings?
In my spambox, there are many various scored mail address.
I want to monitor registered email address and scoring.
I couldn't find method for monitoring or dumping list.
If you look in the
On Tuesday, October 12, 2004, 10:28:06 AM, Nate Schindler wrote:
> Once in a while, I notice a hit for an RBL-related test that seems a little
> off. When I check for the existance of a record in the list, I can't find
> one. Below is a match SA 3 found in an e-mail
> from one of our dealers.
I'm in the process of building a couple of new servers and to run some test
mail through, put one of them on the tertiary address for a domain. While I
know this topic was discussed a while ago I was surprised at what I was
seeing in the logs namely;
- all traffic to the tertiary was UCE
- there
80 matches
Mail list logo
