Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 06:20:17PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
That 62.56% of them was recorded once means recorded by the input of
sa-learn? or by SA autolearn?
Can't say, there is no difference to the database between sa-learn and
autole
> Time error started Jan 30 19:15:04
Jan 30 19:15:04 addr3ss MailScanner[11506]: MailScanner E-Mail Virus Scanner
version 4.38.9 starting...
Jan 30 19:15:04 addr3ss update.virus.scanners: Delaying cron job up to 600
seconds
Jan 30 19:15:04 addr3ss MailScanner[11506]: Could not read
directory
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 06:20:17PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
That 62.56% of them was recorded once means recorded by the input of
sa-learn? or by SA autolearn?
Can't say, there is no difference to the database between sa-learn and
autolearn.
I'm not very sure if t
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 06:20:17PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
> That 62.56% of them was recorded once means recorded by the input of
> sa-learn? or by SA autolearn?
Can't say, there is no difference to the database between sa-learn and
autolearn.
> I'm not very sure if the autolearn is w
francois.baert wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Spamassassin-3.0.2 running on redhat9.0
> spamassassin --lint gives a list of warning like this:
> warning: description for REMOVE_PAGE is over 50 chars
> warning: description for FROM_WEBMAIL_END_NUMS6 is over 50 chars
> ...ie
> lint: 171 issues detected.
>
> Wh
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:24:53AM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
256010 entries kept, 79678 deleted
token frequency: 1-occurence tokens: 62.56%
token frequency: less than 8 occurrences: 29.16%
what are those token frequency mean to?? nothing about it on the man page.
Th
Hello,
Spamassassin-3.0.2 running on redhat9.0
spamassassin --lint gives a list of warning like this:
warning: description for REMOVE_PAGE is over 50 chars
warning: description for FROM_WEBMAIL_END_NUMS6 is over 50 chars
...ie
lint: 171 issues detected.
What does it mean?
Thanks for help
Fran
Bill Shupp wrote:
All,
When trying to upgrade from 2.52 to 3.0.2 via CPAN, I get this during
make test:
t/spamc_B...ok 7/8 Not found: spamflag =
X-Spam-Flag: YES
t/spamc_B...NOK 8# Failed test 8 in t/SATest.pm at
line 530 t/spamc_B...FAILED
At 01:39 PM 2/1/2005, Alan Shine wrote:
when I'm running SA with the default ruleset (the one that comes
with the installation), it proccesses 16 messages per second.
I don't know if it is the avarage amount of messages that SA can proccess.
anyway - 16 per second is not good enough for me - becaus
Michael Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:40:35AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:>> 2. I can't figure out how to turn URIDNSBL off (I couldn't find it > >in the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf). So...how can I turn it off?>Comment out the loadplugin line in init.pre>> 3. The emails t
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:40:35AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:
> 2. I can't figure out how to turn URIDNSBL off (I couldn't find it
>in the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf). So...how can I turn it off?
Comment out the loadplugin line in init.pre
> 3. The emails that are missed as spam have SA markup,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Maul writes:
> EB wrote:
> > We had secured the formmail.pl with the anti-spam version, and we had
> > searched all httpd logs while the spamming occured, but there wasn't
> > any suspicious call to cgi scripts. We think it could be something
> >
Alan Shine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Michael Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 10:59:02AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:> > I understand, but allthough I'm running 5 max children ny CPU is between 0-2% idle. > > (I have dual CPU with hyper thread).> Possibly you are IO bound. Di
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 10:59:02AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:
>
> I understand, but allthough I'm running 5 max children ny CPU is between 0-2%
> idle.
>
> (I have dual CPU with hyper thread).
>
Possibly you are IO bound. Did you turn off bayes/awl? Maybe you're
running URIDNSBL which may not
EB wrote:
We had secured the formmail.pl with the anti-spam version, and we had
searched all httpd logs while the spamming occured, but there wasn't
any suspicious call to cgi scripts. We think it could be something
harder to check, which is PHP.
Could you perhaps grep the apache log and count eac
We had secured the formmail.pl with the anti-spam version, and we had
searched all httpd logs while the spamming occured, but there wasn't
any suspicious call to cgi scripts. We think it could be something
harder to check, which is PHP.
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 10:37:26 -0400, Michael 'Moose' Dinn
<[E
Michael Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 10:39:14AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:>> >>I have one spamd - with the default of 5 max children.>>>This is likely your problem, if you are truly processing at 16 a sec>then 5 children probably won't handle the load. Try upping the nu
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 10:39:14AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:
>
> I have one spamd - with the default of 5 max children.
>
This is likely your problem, if you are truly processing at 16 a sec
then 5 children probably won't handle the load. Try upping the number
of children available. The optimal
Hi,
thanks a lot for your answers, I wrote my responses right after every answer.
>jdow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>It sounds like you are trying to run DNS based rules either without a>DNS or off a test site that does not exist anymore. Some of the BLs that>used to be available are gone.
>And you
Scott Taylor wrote:
> I was running spamd but spam was being badly missed, so while reading
> docs on the SA site, I ran into that new recipe and now it catches a
> lot more spam. spamd is running as root, spawned from
> /etc/init.d/spamassasin, 5 times, although I don't know if I need to
> be doi
Sorry to reply to my own post, but here's a link for for your perusal:
http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2003-09/1730.html
> Don't use Mailscanner with Postfix.
>
> The author of Postfix states that it's not a good idea. I'll
> take his word
> for it.
>
> Kurt
>
> -Original M
Don't use Mailscanner with Postfix.
The author of Postfix states that it's not a good idea. I'll take his word
for it.
Kurt
-Original Message-
From: usha chowdary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 21:18
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Mailscanner
hi
Ia
EB wrote:
We also have a problem to scan outgoing mail. It seems like a user on
our server is making scripts to send out spam to a large list of AOL
users in the "Cc" part that we are still trying to track them down.
The mail header looks as it was sent from our local 127.0.0.1 from
[EMAIL PROTEC
Kris Deugau said:
> Scott Taylor wrote:
> For a global Bayes db, accessible to all users, you must either:
>
> -> Run spamd as a separate user, make sure the bayes_* files are owned
> by that user, and process mail through SA by calling spamc instead of
> spamassassin;
I was running spamd but sp
At 08:24 AM 2/1/2005, you wrote:
We checked the maillog. But the session shows as [127.0.0.1]
127.0.0.1. What config did you put in sendmail to make it shows more?
No idea. I knew about enough to grep the maillogs, modify a config file
here and there, but that's it.
Maybe someone else here know
Scott Taylor wrote:
> I'm using SA 3.0.2 on RHES3 with $LANG set to en_CA invoked with
> system wide configs in '/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf' via users
> .procmailrc with this recipe:
>
> :0fw: spamassassin.lock
> * < 256000
> | spamassassin
>
> I've been all over the docs, FAQs, WiKis on the
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:24:53AM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
> 256010 entries kept, 79678 deleted
> token frequency: 1-occurence tokens: 62.56%
> token frequency: less than 8 occurrences: 29.16%
>
> what are those token frequency mean to?? nothing about it on the man page.
They're just i
We checked the maillog. But the session shows as [127.0.0.1]
127.0.0.1. What config did you put in sendmail to make it shows more?
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 07:26:29 -0800, Evan Platt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 06:34 AM 2/1/2005, you wrote:
> >We also have a problem to scan outgoing mail. It see
Hello all,
I'm using SA 3.0.2 on RHES3 with $LANG set to en_CA invoked with system
wide configs in '/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf' via users .procmailrc
with this recipe:
:0fw: spamassassin.lock
* < 256000
| spamassassin
I've been all over the docs, FAQs, WiKis on the site, but I still can't
At 06:34 AM 2/1/2005, you wrote:
We also have a problem to scan outgoing mail. It seems like a user on
our server is making scripts to send out spam to a large list of AOL
users in the "Cc" part that we are still trying to track them down.
The mail header looks as it was sent from our local 127.0.
Hi
I'm making bench with SA 3.0.2 running with perl 5.8.6
SA is launched by amavisd 2.2.1
It runs on a dual xeon 2.8 with 2GB of ram with a redhat 3
(2.4.21-15.0.4.ELsmp)
I run 2 instances of Postfix with different spool directory (no local
mailboxes)
Making test with postal give me :
Send : 920
>-Original Message-
>From: Dermot Paikkos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:58 AM
>To: Rakesh
>Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: [SUMMARY] Newbie - RBL question
>
>
>Thanx to Rakesh and Kristopher for their replies which lead to
>the solution:
>
>I d
Thanx to Rakesh and Kristopher for their replies which lead to the solution:
I did a spamassassin -D Dermot Paikkos wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Spamd v3.0 with Exim v4.43 using exiscan patch on SlackWare.
> >
> > /usr/bin/perl5.8.0 -T -w /usr/bin/spamd -d -s /var/log/spamd.log
> >
> > I am testi
At 08:28 AM 2/1/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
know issue with sa 3.0x and spamc/spamd. Will ne Fixed with 3.10
work around is lower number of children allowed or apply following patches..
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3983
That really should only be an issue if you are running m
At 06:27 AM 2/1/2005, Alan Shine wrote:
I'm new to SA, and currently testing it in order to integrate it with our
systems.
The performance appears to be very bad - 6 messages per second.
I'm running SA 3.0.1 on DL380 - dual CPU, hyper thread, 4G RAM, with Redhat 8.
spamd is running with the rules
At 04:05 AM 2/1/2005, Gray, Richard wrote:
So it seems resonable for me to write a meta rule for each rule that
checks if a DUL list has been hit and adds a small extra score on?
I assume from what you say that evaluating meta rules is very cheap, so
they shouldn't impact performance by much.
Corre
It sounds like you are trying to run DNS based rules either without a
DNS or off a test site that does not exist anymore. Some of the BLs that
used to be available are gone.
And you should upgrade to 3.0.2 for some stability reasons.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Alan Shine" <[EMAIL
We also have a problem to scan outgoing mail. It seems like a user on
our server is making scripts to send out spam to a large list of AOL
users in the "Cc" part that we are still trying to track them down.
The mail header looks as it was sent from our local 127.0.0.1 from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] user,
Dermot,
The easiest way to get the information you are looking for is to run
spamassassin -D --lint. This should give you a debug output, you can
then look through and find out if something isn't running as expected.
You can also start spamd with -D and it will constantly print out debug
output
Hello,
just run sa-learn --sync after training the bayes and got this messages.
expired old Bayes database entries in 75 seconds
256010 entries kept, 79678 deleted
token frequency: 1-occurence tokens: 62.56%
token frequency: less than 8 occurrences: 29.16%
what are those token frequency mean to?? n
Usha fix the following ...
Feb 1 10:33:33 ethnic postfix: succeeded
Feb 1 10:33:33 ethnic postfix/postsuper[2615]: warning: bogus file
name: hold/razor-agent.log
Feb 1 10:33:33 ethnic postfix/postfix-script: starting the Postfix mail system
Feb 1 10:33:33 ethnic postfix: succeeded
Feb 1
Hi Alan,
I found out the hard way about this
problem as well. Here's the response I got previously on this issue:
Martin Hepworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
01/19/2005 01:02 PM
To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc
users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject
Re: New to SA, problems with production
speed
Hey folks. I'm seeing a fair bit of spam getting through with embedded
GIF images, a slightly redacted version being pasted into the bottom of
this email. I'm trying to write a rule to catch embedded GIFs, but it
just doesn't seem to work. I've tried the following:
fullKP_GIF
Well, for the past year or so I've been using a FreeBSD box running
postfix/amavisd/spamassassin.
All outbound mail from our mx goes to this server and is scanned. Anything
scoring 14 or more is sent to a quarantine mailbox.
This has saved my butt many, many times. Just yesterday, one of our ca
Hi,
I'm new to SA, and currently testing it in order to integrate it with our systems.
The performance appears to be very bad - 6 messages per second.
I'm running SA 3.0.1 on DL380 - dual CPU, hyper thread, 4G RAM, with Redhat 8.
spamd is running with the rules engine only, and with most of the
Usha
quite a few things to correct on the install. Did you follow the postfix
how-to on the MS site? It looks like for a start you've changed the "Run
as User =" seting in MailScanner.conf
(http://www.sng.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailscanner/install/postfix.shtml)
Ask on the MS list, its a little off t
So it seems resonable for me to write a meta rule for each rule that
checks if a DUL list has been hit and adds a small extra score on?
I assume from what you say that evaluating meta rules is very cheap, so
they shouldn't impact performance by much.
Richard
-Original Message-
From: Mat
hi
Iam using postfix with ldap and courier-imap.now I configured
mailscanner with spamassasin,razor and dcc.After restarting the
postfix and Mailscanner I am getting errormessages continuosly.my os
is mandrake 10.0
My error messages are
Feb 1 10:33:33 ethnic postfix: succeeded
Feb 1 10:33:33
All,
When trying to upgrade from 2.52 to 3.0.2 via CPAN, I get this during
make test:
t/spamc_B...ok 7/8 Not found: spamflag =
X-Spam-Flag: YES
t/spamc_B...NOK 8# Failed test 8 in t/SATest.pm at line
530
t/spamc_B...FAILED test
8
At 02:42 PM 1/31/2005, you wrote:
Hello all,
I am looking for a way to spam-check outgoing mail, so the users
registered with my server cannot send out spam (or viruses).
My server is using squirrelmail for sending e-mail, so the mail is
generated on the server and sent directly using SMTP (in squi
Hello Martin,
Monday, January 31, 2005, 2:50:39 AM, you wrote:
MS> Hi,
MS> since lately rulesdujour has stopped updating the rules; instead
MS> it complains that spamassassin --lint fails (which prints a lot
MS> of warnings). I've tried using sa30-check but it doesn't help.
Judging from
warning:
On Monday 31 January 2005 09:47 am, Martin Schröder wrote:
> On 2005-01-31 15:41:13 +, Ron McKeating wrote:
> > Shutting down spamd: [ OK ]
> > Starting spamd: Could not create INET socket on 127.0.0.1:783: Address
> > already in use (IO::Socket::INET: Address already in use)
> > [FAILED]
> >
Just wondering if anyone knows whether or not spamassassin can or does
scan tnef encoded message bodies?
ie - decode tnef content before doing the various spam checks...
53 matches
Mail list logo
