On Sat, Jan 29, 2005 at 08:52:12AM -0800, Loren Wilton wrote:
> Hum, I thought they had a workaround for that problem. Which
> OS/version are you on? This is a problem in one of the Perl modules
> that SA uses; I forget which one.
This problem is caused by the Sys::Hostname::Long module. I got h
On Sat, Jan 29, 2005 at 11:38:50AM -0800, Loren Wilton wrote:
> > in 70_sare_spoof.cf some scores are set to 104.
> > What is the reason to set such high scores? (I know how to lower them)
>
> The spoof rules are to catch forgeries for things like Paypal and Ebay and
> various banks. These are t
I suspect you basically are in a clean install state at the moment, with a
zapped Bayes db. YOu can do a dump magic to see the number of spam and ham
tokens in the db. Probably you just have to re-learn the mandatory couple
hundred spam and ham messages to get Bayes running again. Alternately yo
> in 70_sare_spoof.cf some scores are set to 104.
> What is the reason to set such high scores? (I know how to lower them)
The spoof rules are to catch forgeries for things like Paypal and Ebay and
various banks. These are things that people might have whitelisted with a
simple whitelist command.
Hi,
In error I ran sa-learn --clear, and now spamassassin misses most
spam. How would I return the database to the state of a clean
install?
Stuart
Hi,
in 70_sare_spoof.cf some scores are set to 104.
So a hit in error would mark the mail as a FP. From my understanding,
the idea SA uses is to have multiple rules with quite low scores each,
but when they sum up, the mail get a high score. If a rule matches in
error, there is still a good chance
On Friday 28 January 2005 6:05 pm, jdow wrote:
> I would ask the tweebs who black listed you precisely how they track it
> to your address. I'd love to hear their reasoning.
Oh, I did! First they told me they couldn't provide anything more than the
hash signatures and timestamps (of the reports,
I'm running Linux From Scratch v6.0.
I've now noticed that doing a non-CPAN install of Mail-SPF-Query-1.997
as root has the same problem when doing the make test. Google hasn't
turned up a workaround for this yet.
Steve
Loren Wilton wrote:
Hum, I thought they had a workaround for that problem. Wh
Hum, I thought they had a workaround for that problem. Which OS/version are
you on?
This is a problem in one of the Perl modules that SA uses; I forget which
one.
Installing as root isn't a good idea, especially because of this little bug.
There should have been a comment in the release notes som
I've tried building/testing Spamassassin 3.02 as root and then as a regular
user - both times the SPF test failed, but I've noticed that if I test as root
the system ends up thinking its hostname is --fqdn. Are there two versions of
hostname around for Linux and only one of them has a --fqdn flag,
hi
I am using postfix with courier-imap and ldap.I want to configure
SpamAssasin for my mail server.I installed Spamassasin in my machine.I
don't know how to configure and testing .Can any one pls help me
Thanking u
usha
At 09:05 PM 1/28/2005, jdow wrote:
Doesn't it, though. I'm wondering about who has infected the root
name servers with the pervert.worldmexico.com address. That is "not
nice" to say the least.
Erm, they haven't infected the root servers J... ns2.can02.de. and
ns1.can02.de are the servers reportin
At 08:38 PM 1/28/2005, Kelson wrote:
Here it's the third Received line, the one claiming to be "worn" in the
HELO and "maxwell.fururamail.com" in the reverse DNS. Assuming the first
line (from the reporter's ISP) is accurate, they picked up the message
from a Roadrunner broadband account. Prob
Known problem. Its in bugzilla. When people get a chance to kill it
I'll be among the early adopters. In the mean time I am only serving
for myself so I rolled all my runes and rules into a "99_jdow.cf" file
in /etc/mail/spamassassin and let spamd handle them directly. It's
just a little more akwar
Greetings,
This is a weird one. After restarting spamd, and running tests with
'spamc -l -r < file' on a spam that triggers a custom rule, my rule is
scored correctly 5 times. On the 6th test, it reverts to the default
score of 1.0.
Placing the rule in local.cf fixes this (at least up to 10-12
it
From: "Kelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Matt Kettler wrote:
> > At 07:01 PM 1/28/2005, Kelson wrote:
> >
> >> Meanwhile, we've been getting complaints about spam which, on
> >> analysis, clearly contains forged Received headers. They have our IP
> >> but the wrong HELO, and no or wrong reverse DNS...
Matt Kettler wrote:
At 07:01 PM 1/28/2005, Kelson wrote:
Meanwhile, we've been getting complaints about spam which, on
analysis, clearly contains forged Received headers. They have our IP
but the wrong HELO, and no or wrong reverse DNS...and of course they
don't show up in our logs. So we know
At 07:01 PM 1/28/2005, Kelson wrote:
Meanwhile, we've been getting complaints about spam which, on analysis,
clearly contains forged Received headers. They have our IP but the wrong
HELO, and no or wrong reverse DNS...and of course they don't show up in
our logs. So we know spammers are out th
Ah, it's not safe to open the root directory. You should redirect
email for root to an unprivileged account. 'Nix systems are not
like Windows systems in which you really can't do a blasted thing
as a normal user. They are designed so that the only thing you do
as root is reconfigure the system.
{
19 matches
Mail list logo
