Bayes is doing a good job here recognizing scams. Since bayes_99 has never
been wrong here I gave it the spam-level.
For example in this mail bayes is the ONLY hit, where would I be without
bayes ;-)
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=6.2 kill=6.2 tests=[BAYES_99=6.2]
X-Spam-Score: 6.2
My Dear Beloveth,
I
It may well. I don't know of SpamAssassin itself writes anything to
the system logs, for sure. I do rather believe it does not. I'd fire
off spamd and use spamc pretty much the same way as you use spamassassin,
EXCEPT, I am not silly enough to use AmiVis or ClamAV, which insulate me
from being able
>...
>
>There's a rule NO_DNS_FOR_FROM which checks for an A or MX record for
>the sending IP, but no similar rule checking for PTR (reverse DNS)
>entries - and it's not clear to me why not.
>
>Anyone able to enlighten me?
>
>=20- steve
>
>PS: I'm aware that these checks are often used at the MTA l
Title: Checking for PTR?
There's a rule NO_DNS_FOR_FROM which checks for an A or MX record for the sending IP, but no similar rule checking for PTR (reverse DNS) entries - and it's not clear to me why not.
Anyone able to enlighten me?
- steve
PS: I'm aware that these checks are often u
Interesting. I get all zeros using either the factory config as shown
*or* the modified version.
I'm using an amavisd/postfix config where I call spamassassin rather
than spamd. It looks to me as if sa-stats.pl may assume spamd - is that
the case, and if so is there an alternative version?
- st
Fascinating. Somebody else must have made it sane.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Thursday 04 August 2005 05:21 pm, jdow wrote:
> > As it comes from the "factory":
> > # Configuration section
> > my %opt = ();
> > $opt{'logfile'} = '/var/log/maillog';
On Thursday 04 August 2005 05:21 pm, jdow wrote:
> As it comes from the "factory":
> # Configuration section
> my %opt = ();
> $opt{'logfile'} = '/var/log/maillog';# Log file
> $opt{'sendmail'} = '/usr/sbin/sendmail';# Path to sendmail stub
> $opt{'from'} = 'SpamAssassin System Admin';
> For the devs, this is how Exim parses spamd's output. You guys see
> anything odd about this?
>
> if( sscanf(CS spamd_buffer,
> "SPAMD/%s 0 EX_OK\r\nContent-length: %*u\r\n\r\n%lf/%lf\r\n%n",
> spamd_version,&spamd_score,&spamd_threshold,
> &spamd_report_offset) != 3 ) {
>/* try to fal
As it comes from the "factory":
# Configuration section
my %opt = ();
$opt{'logfile'} = '/var/log/maillog';# Log file
$opt{'sendmail'} = '/usr/sbin/sendmail';# Path to sendmail stub
$opt{'from'} = 'SpamAssassin System Admin';# Who is the mail from
$opt{'end'} = "";
$opt{'start'} = "
Jeffrey Randow wrote:
> Is there a way to tell SpamAssassin to ignore the Resent headers when
> doing a whitelist check? I tried searching and couldn't find any
> resolution to this.
>
> I currently have one email account that basically forwards all emails
> recieved to my main email account that
Is there a way to tell SpamAssassin to ignore the Resent headers when
doing a whitelist check? I tried searching and couldn't find any
resolution to this.
I currently have one email account that basically forwards all emails
recieved to my main email account that has SpamAssassin enabled. Howeve
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> Matt Kettler wrote:
>
>>Yes, bayes poison should be trained without worry. However, bayes poison is
>>not
>>the topic of discussion here. We are talking about mis-learning, something
>>COMPLETELY different.
>
>
> Kai Schaetzl talked about "prevent[ing] you from accident
At 03:24 AM 8/4/2005, Loren Wilton wrote:
Someone reported something very similar to this on the list a month or so
ago. It turned out (if I recall correctly) that he had something broken
outside SA such that received headers that wrapped to a second line weren't
starting with the required space
Herb Martin wrote:
40-50 a day (over 9 days) for low volume mail server. Another
server was primary MX until yesterday, and now I am picking off
much of the junk before it even gets to SpamD.
Ouch, that's a lot.
It was so prevalent when I first switch this Exim server to primary
that my thin
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 10:11 pm, jdow wrote:
>
> Can't really remember where I picked it up from.
>
> < But it appears you changed the default settings which give the
> null reports. (The userstats and topusers options on the latter
> one don't SEEM to do anything, either.)
>
> {^_^}
I'
Matt Kettler wrote:
>
> Yes, bayes poison should be trained without worry. However, bayes poison is
> not
> the topic of discussion here. We are talking about mis-learning, something
> COMPLETELY different.
Kai Schaetzl talked about "prevent[ing] you from accidently poisoning
your Bayes db", so
As Matt notes, there is no space shown before the "by" clause.
Someone reported something very similar to this on the list a month or so
ago. It turned out (if I recall correctly) that he had something broken
outside SA such that received headers that wrapped to a second line weren't
starting wit
At 03:05 AM 8/4/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm new to the list but have been running SA for some time
I am using spamassassin-3.0.4-1.fc3
with qmail-scanner-1.25-st-qms
+
Some of the "received-header: unknown format" entries:--
This header from a SPAM email scored at 13.3/5.0
...
J
I'm new to the list but have been running SA for some time
I am using spamassassin-3.0.4-1.fc3
with qmail-scanner-1.25-st-qms
+ autowhitelist
No Razor
No Pyzor
No Bayes
on a test system to evaluate SA.
I had been running successfully (only a few spam emails getting through
until shortly after
19 matches
Mail list logo
