sc2.surbl.org, the improved version of the SpamCop SURBL list, is
ready for testing. So is the new version of xs.surbl.org, which
is now more accurate, has far fewer FPs, etc.
sc2 adds resolved IP checks, meaning sites hosted on the same
networks are detected immediately upon the first report. I
All,
Thank you to everyone who replied on this thread. FWIW, the issue was in fact with Net::DNS. I actually had previously had contact with him regarding other problems, but 0.51 was working for me on another system, so I was a little surprised that this was the fix. I upgraded to the newes
Fixed my own problem with
postsuper –r ALL
thanks for listening
Robert
Peace he would say instead of
goodbyepeace my brother.
From: Robert Swan
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 6:10
PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Postfix p
Hello All,
I had a DNS issue and postfix placed all my mail in a “deferred”
folder in the “/var/spool/postfix” directory, and after fixing the
DNS issue the old mail is still there, anyone know how to flush it out?
I am running Spamassassin 3.04 and postfix, spamd spamc on
redhat 9
On Thursday, July 21, 2005, 7:28:53 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
> Hello,
> I've been watching some of the misses that have passed through
> spamassassin (3.0.4) lately and they are pretty clean; no DNS BL hits,
> etc.
> One thing I did notice is that many of them have a fairly contorted URL
>
OK. I added the internal_networks setting listing my only MX (It's not
trusted, as it's used by many other users, and isn't under my control.)
# Trusted Networks
trusted_networks69.25.118.171
# Internal Networks
internal_networks 207.234.226.49
OK. So the trusted_networks line, s
On Tuesday, July 19, 2005, 5:24:21 AM, Paolo as2594 wrote:
> Hi, what follows is certainly OT for SpamAssassin.
> I am setting up SA3 with SURBL support, and I am configuring RBLDNSD in
> order to run a local SURBL copy.
> Before asking for rsync permission, I'd like to test the configuration
>
John T. Yocum wrote:
Hello,
I've recently noticed that a lot of spam is getting through SpamAssassin,
and it's getting the ALL_TRUSTED test listed on it. The issue with that
is, I only have one IP trusted, and that's my own mail server.
# Trusted Networks
trusted_networks 69.25.118.171
As yo
On 7/24/05, John T. Yocum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've recently noticed that a lot of spam is getting through SpamAssassin,
> and it's getting the ALL_TRUSTED test listed on it. The issue with that
> is, I only have one IP trusted, and that's my own mail server.
>
>
> # Trusted N
christophe, you DO know that "cat spam" merely prints out your raw
spam file so it should not have any markup in it.
If you want to view a permanent marked up file you need to run:
spamc < spam >spam_marked_up
Or something like that. Remember that spamc takes stdin, filters, and
feeds back out st
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 12:31:46AM +0200, christophe wrote:
> spamd is running perfectly as a daemon.
> I copied a spam mail in the file 'spam'.
Ok.
> If i run one of these 2 commands :
> $spamassassin < spam
> $spamc -E < spam
> i get an output with 'X-Spam-Flag: YES', which is what i want to tr
I spent my last days googling, reading tutorials, man pages and spamassassin
web sites and tried many differents settings for spamassassin (version 3.0.4)
but without success. So i have no other solutions than asking you.
Here is the content of my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf file :
---
On Sunday 24 July 2005 13:39, jdow wrote:
>From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> I wonder if perhaps earthlink is not the only ISP with that
>> problem. I have my vz prefs set to delete any detected spam as I
>> have now switched to a fetchmail based mail suck.
>>
>> Haveing a kmail problem
Hello,
I've recently noticed that a lot of spam is getting through SpamAssassin,
and it's getting the ALL_TRUSTED test listed on it. The issue with that
is, I only have one IP trusted, and that's my own mail server.
# Trusted Networks
trusted_networks 69.25.118.171
As you can see in the below
From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I wonder if perhaps earthlink is not the only ISP with that problem.
> I have my vz prefs set to delete any detected spam as I have now
> switched to a fetchmail based mail suck.
>
> Haveing a kmail problem the other day, I logged in via the webmail a
On Sunday 24 July 2005 11:19, Loren Wilton wrote:
>> Haveing a kmail problem the other day, I logged in via the webmail
>> at vz, and found 9 messages, all spam, sitting in the spam folder
>> there.
>
>On Dirtlink (which seems from your description to be using the same
>near-useless webmail as vz)
> Haveing a kmail problem the other day, I logged in via the webmail at
> vz, and found 9 messages, all spam, sitting in the spam folder there.
On Dirtlink (which seems from your description to be using the same
near-useless webmail as vz) you have a few choices and a very few things
that happen a
John Rudd wrote:
The only problem I can think of is than an ampersand in a _URL_ is legal
(IIRC, in CGI form urls, ampersand is used to delimit different
variables, so if the URL question contains some form of context, like
ack'ing a sign-up, it might legitimately contain an &). So, you need t
On Saturday 23 July 2005 13:13, jdow wrote:
>From: "Jeffrey Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Are they any rules to stop this type of spam? It is continually
>> growing and doesnt ever let up.
>
>One thing I discovered is that these spams CAN upset the combination
>of fetchmail and the Earthlink pop3 s
19 matches
Mail list logo
