Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
debug: running raw-body-text per-line regexp tests; score so
far=8.789 There it stays for ages, using 100% cpu
Any known problem? I'd be happy to provide the mail in
question to anyone interested.
Time for you to upgrade. If the problem still exists in 3.0.1, plea
>
> debug: running raw-body-text per-line regexp tests; score so
> far=8.789 There it stays for ages, using 100% cpu
>
> Any known problem? I'd be happy to provide the mail in
> question to anyone interested.
>
Time for you to upgrade. If the problem still exists in 3.0.1, please
let us kno
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Matias Lopez Bergero, *,
Matias Lopez Bergero wrote on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 04:27:20PM -0300:
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/Utf8Performance
>
> Maybe it helps you.
No it didn't. I am not running on UTF8 ... my System is still set to
[EMAIL
Hi
I've just noticed two messages tonight which for some reason kept up my
SpamAssassin 2.64 for nearly 15 and 7 Minutes respectively!!?
My log shows for those two messages:
Nov 26 19:30:40 mindblow amavisd[3846]: (03846-09) TIMING [total 846599
ms] - SMTP LHLO: 5 (0%), SMTP pre-MAIL: 3 (0%), SM
[off topic from the rest of my post: wow spamd uses a lot of memory! I
limited it to 5 processes because each one is 22-26 megs!]
Okay, I can't seem to find anything on the bayes_xx rules (bayes_20,
bayes_50, etc) via google. My apologies but I cannot find a reasonable
"FM" to read, basically.
Rainer Bendig aka Ny wrote:
I am using spamassassin Version 3.0.1-1 from debian unstable and i am
invoking spamc via my ~/.procmailrc as postet here:
> And for a 8593 bytes large e-Mail it need 6.3 seconds to scan (spamd
syslog message)
The neg of the bottle is not the hardware, its overhead for
s
problem solved.
the thing was the LANG variable, it as set to en_US.UTF-8, I set to
en_US and that was the end of the problem. :-X
RB,
Matías
ps. it is still geting to much spam trought, where should i read to
solve this??
Matías López Bergero wrote:
Hello Matt,
Thank you for ur answer,
Matt Ke
> Id say its because you have a dynamic ip address. You might want to
> send all mail out through your isp's mail servers instead.
>
> Hmmm, but I have my own domain, and I want all my email to come from
my domain, my isp will not
> route email from my domain (ntl) through their mail servers, th
Jerry Bell wrote:
When I run it manually, this is what I get:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on db.stelesys.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
version=3.0.1
X-Spam-Level:
What's this best way to get it out of the AWL and b
On Friday 26 November 2004 10:18 am, Ron McKeating wrote:
> Hmmm, but I have my own domain, and I want all my email to come from my
> domain, my isp will not route email from my domain (ntl) through their
> mail servers, they want my to use my [EMAIL PROTECTED] account. I want to
> use my [EMAIL P
On Friday 26 November 2004 09:54 am, Jim Maul wrote:
> >
> > I'm using Sprint DSL, not a dial-up connection. I've contacted sorbs
> > about this and am awaiting an answer. I've quit using fetchmail for
> > now. Any ideas on why this happened?
>
> Id say its because you have a dynamic ip address.
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 15:54, Jim Maul wrote:
> Chris wrote:
> > I was messing around with fetchmail yesterday seeing if I could get it to
> > work for the first time. After playing with it for a few hours and seeing
> > that it was working I happened to notice one of my crontab messages was in
When I run it manually, this is what I get:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on db.stelesys.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
version=3.0.1
X-Spam-Level:
What's this best way to get it out of the AWL and bayes?
Thanks for
Jerry Bell wrote:
I wonder if my bayes db has been poisoned to the point of thinking this is
ham? In the logs, it autolearned this one as ham, so I suspect that may
be the case.
You say it scored 0 points..does this mean it triggered no rules or the
+ - rules totaled up to 0? Regardless of bayes
A) Is your ip dynamic?
B) Has your isp listed all it's IP as being res/dynamic? (Most, if not
all, ISP's will list their DSL/Cable ip's as being dynamic for some
reason or another (lazyness imo), my home one is listed as dynamic,
however, it's static (I paid for it) the big reason is their polic
Chris wrote:
I was messing around with fetchmail yesterday seeing if I could get it to
work for the first time. After playing with it for a few hours and seeing
that it was working I happened to notice one of my crontab messages was in
the right folder, but marked as spam. Looking at the head
I wonder if my bayes db has been poisoned to the point of thinking this is
ham? In the logs, it autolearned this one as ham, so I suspect that may
be the case.
> Jerry Bell wrote:
>> I'm using SA through exim/exiscan, and I've got it set up to only report
>> if it is spam. Guess I should change t
On 11/26/2004 4:42 PM +0200, Chris wrote:
> I'm using Sprint DSL, not a dial-up connection. I've contacted sorbs about
this and am awaiting an answer. I've quit using fetchmail for now. Any
ideas on why this happened?
That sorbs sublist considers most cable/dsl connections as DUL.
Niek
--
Use
Jerry Bell wrote:
I'm using SA through exim/exiscan, and I've got it set up to only report
if it is spam. Guess I should change that.
The SA logs showing it getting a score of 0. SA is working really well
for me the other 99% of the time.
Jerry
Jerry Bell wrote:
This spam went through with a scor
I was messing around with fetchmail yesterday seeing if I could get it to
work for the first time. After playing with it for a few hours and seeing
that it was working I happened to notice one of my crontab messages was in
the right folder, but marked as spam. Looking at the headers and spam
I'm using SA through exim/exiscan, and I've got it set up to only report
if it is spam. Guess I should change that.
The SA logs showing it getting a score of 0. SA is working really well
for me the other 99% of the time.
Jerry
> Jerry Bell wrote:
>> This spam went through with a score of 0. I'
Jerry Bell wrote:
This spam went through with a score of 0. I'm using 3.01 with most of the
sare rulesets. Any ideas on how to catch these?
Thanks,
Jerry
http://www.syslog.org
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery-date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 1
This spam went through with a score of 0. I'm using 3.01 with most of the
sare rulesets. Any ideas on how to catch these?
Thanks,
Jerry
http://www.syslog.org
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery-date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:53:39 -0500
R
> hello List,
>
> the name resolver works just fine on my new mailserver, but
> spamassassin cannot resolve anything. spamassassin -D --lint says
>
> "debug: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
> debug: Net::DNS version: 0.48
> debug: trying (3) cingular.com...
> debug: looking up NS for 'cingu
At 09:28 AM 11/26/2004 +0100, Sven Ehret wrote:
debug: NS lookup of cingular.com failed horribly => Perhaps your
resolv.conf isn't pointing at a valid server?
debug: All NS queries failed => DNS unavailable (set dns_available to
override)
debug: is DNS available? 0"
Name resolving per se works:
[
hello List,
the name resolver works just fine on my new mailserver, but
spamassassin cannot resolve anything. spamassassin -D --lint says
"debug: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
debug: Net::DNS version: 0.48
debug: trying (3) cingular.com...
debug: looking up NS for 'cingular.com'
debug: NS
Mathias Koerber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In what way?
Reply to mailing list messages.
> But that also wants to consider M-IDs of mails received and listed
> as non-spam. IMHO, a more restrictive set (only M-IDs sent from the
> local site are checked against) would be better and much harder
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 18:35, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Mathias Koerber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > There are two tests I would like to use to whitelist incoming email.
> >
> > a) If it's References: or In-Reply-To: header matches a Message-ID
> >of a mail sent out through my server. This
I agree, autolearn in conjunction with the odd manual insert works very well
here, although I'm still having troubles blocking the variation of those
ridicoulous drugs/rx msgs.
0.000 01781758 0 non-token data: nspam
0.000 0 319835 0 non-token data: nha
Hi,
on debian/woody sa-stats.pl ends with following errors:
Error in option spec: "top|T:25"
Error in option spec: "SCALAR(0x84ff7f4)"
The getopt libs might be to old on woody. Are there any other programms to get
some nice statists of spam and ham? I'm using spamassassin 3.0.1 with a
send
Hiya,
I am just building up a new POP server for our users to replace our ageing
old mail server.
I already have a separate machine doing Spam Assassin, which is run on a
system wide basis and I just redirect certain domain names that want
filtering via it.
On this new server, I am running postf
Hello,
I am running spamassassin 3.0.1 on debian and I am having problems
with SPF records. The relevant TXT records are:
terminus:/var/log# host -t TXT anize.org.
anize.org TXT "v=spf1 a mx ~all"
terminus:/var/log# host -t TXT terminus.anize.org
terminus.anize.org TXT
32 matches
Mail list logo
