"Spam Filtering" gets a (neat) mention in the PHD comic strip:
http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=608
Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju
Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Mont
It's sounding like the sc2 list is catching 10-15% more spam than
the sc list, based on some early reports of SA users. Is anyone
else getting some results?
Are there differences in ham hits?
Has anyone been able to run them through their test corpora?
How about xs.surbl.org?
Jeff C.
--
Don't
User running spamd == owner(/etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes_*) ?
Maybe you change the parameters for spamd like -u spamd and it was running with root.
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 20:19 -0400, Dr Robert Young wrote:
We are using SA 3.0.4 w/ milter-spamc 0.25
Started seeing some
We are using SA 3.0.4 w/ milter-spamc 0.25Started seeing some of these in the last day or two in the maillog...any ideas?ction=eoh, continueJul 29 18:57:21 email1 spamd[13210]: Cannot open bayes databases /etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes_* R/W: tie failed: Permission denied
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 04:25:20PM -0700, jdow wrote:
>>From the last few days:
>>
>> SURBL Hits
>> --- ---
>> URIBL_PH_SURBL3
>> URIBL_AB_SURBL5,342
>> URIBL_XS_SURBL3,529
>> URIBL_JP_SURBL 14,423
>> URIBL_SC2_SURBL 5,681
>> URIB
It sure would help to know how may of those hits were on ham vice spam.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Clay Irving" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >From the last few days:
>
> SURBL Hits
> --- ---
> URIBL_PH_SURBL3
> URIBL_AB_SURBL5,342
> UR
> Matt Kettler writes:
> BTW, there have been some reports recently that some versions
> of the Net::DNS module are nonfunctional, resulting in DNS
> checks being skipped
> in SpamAssassin. if you run "spamassassin -D -t < testmsg", it'll
> indicate whether "dns is available" -- if that says "
Usually, I'm pretty good at following instructions. I have done so, far
as I can tell.
SA works fine.
ClamAV works, in that clamd starts, listens on the correct port, and
clamdscan works fine.
but. . .
spamassassin --lint throws this:
# /usr/local/bin/spamassassin --lint
failed to create i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matt Kettler writes:
> Frank M. Cook wrote:
> > the silver lining instead the problems I've been having is that I
> > learned my rbl checking was screwed up. one of the things I did when my
> > spamassassin started to backup was to have my mailserver
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>
>>Magnus Holmgren wrote on Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:06:20 +0200:
>>
>>
>>
>>>In other words, is there a way to bypass the 3 points minimum for header
>>>and body? (Why isn't that limit configurable, by the way?)
>>
>>
>>It's trying to prevent you from acc
Frank M. Cook wrote:
> the silver lining instead the problems I've been having is that I
> learned my rbl checking was screwed up. one of the things I did when my
> spamassassin started to backup was to have my mailserver check three
> rbl's ahead of spamassassin and simply throw out hits. the am
>From the last few days:
SURBL Hits
--- ---
URIBL_PH_SURBL3
URIBL_AB_SURBL5,342
URIBL_XS_SURBL3,529
URIBL_JP_SURBL 14,423
URIBL_SC2_SURBL 5,681
URIBL_OB_SURBL 11,742
URIBL_SC_SURBL5,097
URIBL_WS_SURBL9,931
--
Clay
the silver lining instead the problems I've been having is that I learned
my rbl checking was screwed up. one of the things I did when my
spamassassin started to backup was to have my mailserver check three rbl's ahead
of spamassassin and simply throw out hits. the amount of spam went way
we ran a session with -D and saw messages saying the DB wasn't
installed. it is. we thought maybe the problem was an access list
and added the local IP to the list in case the DB was being blocked but that
didn't seem to help. we've turned Bayes off for now and now we're getting
autolear
At 10:39 AM 7/29/2005, Matthew Yette wrote:
Gotcha Matt - thank you very much for the explaination. I was under the
(false) assumption that the AWL factor for a message was simply the
total score of all messages from that sender divided by the number of
messages from the sender. I didn't realize
Gotcha Matt - thank you very much for the explaination. I was under the
(false) assumption that the AWL factor for a message was simply the
total score of all messages from that sender divided by the number of
messages from the sender. I didn't realize it was not just that number,
but that number c
At 08:22 AM 7/29/2005, Matthew Yette wrote:
I've been getting emails from [EMAIL PROTECTED] which my
spam filter rightly tags as spam. However, the rules it flags are as
follows:
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=6.7 required=5.0
What troubles me is the AWL score.
It should not.
Pulling up stats on
At 09:57 AM 7/29/2005, Joe Woltering wrote:
I'm running Spamassassin 3.0.4 on a Dell Poweredge 750 with 2.8 Ghx CPU
and 2 Gb of RAM. I have configured it with amavisd-new, clamd, dccifd,
razor and pyzor. We're handling approximately 225 domains w/ app.
5000-6000 users.
Everything is running g
Hi,
I'm running
Spamassassin 3.0.4 on a Dell Poweredge 750 with 2.8 Ghx CPU and 2 Gb of RAM. I
have configured it with amavisd-new, clamd, dccifd, razor and pyzor. We're
handling approximately 225 domains w/ app. 5000-6000 users.
Everything is
running great w/ the exception that the memo
Andy Jezierski wrote:
Dr Robert Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/28/2005
07:06:35 PM:
> Have a virus scanner that correctly identified the email as having a
> virus attachment, but it still passed along the "cleaned" (ie the
> attachment was removed) email. I was asked if there
Dr Robert Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 07/28/2005 07:06:35 PM:
> Have a virus scanner that correctly identified the email as having
a
> virus attachment, but it still passed along the "cleaned"
(ie the
> attachment was removed) email. I was asked if there was a way
to
> "trash" the
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mark Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Jul 29, 2005 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: Relearning/routing spam/ham with Outlook client
To: Herb Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Thanks for that Herb appreciate the perl script, but am definately
looking for Procmail s
I'd be able to code it in myself but I'm not fluent in perl (PHP guy)
and of course, the string parsing functions confuse the hell out of me.
LOL. Thought that there might be a lot of perl coders here who can make
this a snap. [Recipient-domain-based filtering & date range also]
Thanks so much!
-
I've been getting emails from [EMAIL PROTECTED] which my
spam filter rightly tags as spam. However, the rules it flags are as
follows:
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=6.7 required=5.0
X-Spam-Level: ++
X-Spam-Report: SA TESTS
1.5 NO_REAL_NAME From: does not include a real name
0.1 EXCUSE
Dr Robert Young wrote:
But you can use milter-spamc to direct all identified "spam" to an acct
such as [EMAIL PROTECTED], and then simply 'dump' the acct's email
periodically. Hence the inquiry
On Jul 28, 2005, at 8:14 PM, jdow wrote:
Please check with the ClamAV people. There is abs
Ah, but milter-spamc is not a part of SpamAssassin, either. There are
dozens of ways to do it. But if you try the wrong one for your
configuration you experience conflict hell, a state with which it
appears you are already intimately experienced with in this specific
context. Who WANTS that?
{^_^}
>From the last three days:
SpamAssassinRuleHits for SPAM (score 10 and higher):
BAYES_99 ( 95%)
RAZOR2_CHECK ( 90%)
RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 ( 85%)
DIGEST_MULTIPLE ( 74%)
URIBL_BLACK ( 72%)
But you can use milter-spamc to direct all identified "spam" to an
acct such as [EMAIL PROTECTED], and then simply 'dump' the acct's email
periodically. Hence the inquiry
On Jul 28, 2005, at 8:14 PM, jdow wrote:
Please check with the ClamAV people. There is absolutely no way to get
Sp
On Monday 25 July 2005 01:14 am, Jeff Chan wrote:
> Please test sc2 and the revised xs and let us know how they
> perform for you. Those with large spam and ham corpora (such as
> the SpamAssassin developers) are encouraged to test and please
> let us know.
Although I don't have a large amount o
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:34 AM
> To: Loren Wilton
> Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Relearning/routing spam/ham with Outlook client
>
> I like the sound of option 1 for our organisation. Here is m
I like the sound of option 1 for our organisation. Here is my thinking:
1. Have users create a new mail message and attach the "spam" message
to it. Send the message with attachment to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2.Use Procmail to make sure there is an attachment. If no attachment
send received message to
I like the sound of option 1 for our organisation. Here is my thinking:
1. Have users create a new mail message and attach the "spam" message
to it. Send the message with attachment to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2.Use Procmail to make sure there is an attachment. If no attachment
send received message to
> Have a virus scanner that correctly identified the email as having a
> virus attachment, but it still passed along the "cleaned" (ie the
> attachment was removed) email. I was asked if there was a way to
> "trash" the resulting "cleaned" email...
Ah! Different question! Yes, that should be p
mouss wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Can't locate Mail/Spamassassin/BayesStore/SQL.pm in @INC (@INC contains:
>
>
> did you install the perl DBD-mysql module?
>
I thought I made it clear when I first answered, but perhaps not.
It's just a typo Spamassassin should be SpamAssassin in the
b
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Magnus Holmgren wrote on Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:06:20 +0200:
>
>
>>In other words, is there a way to bypass the 3 points minimum for header
>>and body? (Why isn't that limit configurable, by the way?)
>
>
> It's trying to prevent you from accidently poisoning your Bayes db.
35 matches
Mail list logo
