>Please see, and comment on, bug 4696:
>
>http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4696
>
Not sure if my comments made it to that so here they are:
Similar problem here with it dying at random during the day. No
recycling of logs or anything here. Linux kernel 2.6.12.2 with SA 3.1
an
If you are using the perl of 5.8.0 or higher,it process the unicode
characters well.So you should not worry about that Perl how to interpret
the Chinese character.Just use the rules as normally as english language.
From: Vincent Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
hi daryl,
> I'd open a bug on this, or at least bring it up on the dev list. It
> looks like this was just overlooked during the (ongoing) sa-update
> implementation.
per a comment *from* the sare list, it seems that -- though it wasn't in the
On 09/01/2006 7:36 PM, George R. Kasica wrote:
Jan 9 15:31:07 eagle spamd[8420]: spamd: processing message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for mail:561
Jan 9 15:34:55 eagle spamd[8715]: __alarm__
Jan 9 15:35:01 eagle spamd[8715]: __alarm__
Jan 9 15:35:01 eagle spamd[8311]: prefork: child states: BBBI
On 06/01/2006 6:22 PM, OpenMacNews wrote:
In theory SA should check your build-time specified directory first, unless
something got screwed up in the build process and SpamAssassin.pm is looking in
the wrong places.
that's what i'd presumed, if not legitimately understood.
i'm not yet certai
On 05/01/2006 11:23 AM, Matt Kettler wrote:
Billy Huddleston wrote:
Is their a way to get the URI's to look at stuff like this?? I'm seeing
more and more spam with these kinds of things in them to get by URI
detection..
http://asia.geocities.com/april19781matt1487
Do you mean URIBL's? Not
On 05/01/2006 1:56 PM, Jason Haar wrote:
Leonardo Rodrigues Magalhães wrote:
Hello Guys,
I have SA running with amavisd/postfix. I also have several
external users with dinamic IP addresses which are allowed to relay
using my server because they authenticate, i have SASL running.
The pr
On 05/01/2006 7:27 AM, Leonardo Rodrigues Magalhães wrote:
Hello Guys,
I have SA running with amavisd/postfix. I also have several external
users with dinamic IP addresses which are allowed to relay using my
server because they authenticate, i have SASL running.
The problem is that
On 04/01/2006 5:39 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
mouss wrote:
What happens with the _spf version if
- the domain allows any client to send
?
Thus, don't use the SPF whitelist form domains you don't trust to be
non-malicious. Then again, if you don't trust them to be non-malicious, you
probably
On 03/01/2006 5:19 AM, Chris Purves wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm getting the errormessage below;
Who can help ?
Wolfgang
Jan 2 09:25:58 saxophon spamd[13330]: spamd: connection from
localhost [127.0.0.1] at port 40156
Jan 2 09:25:58 saxophon spamd[13330]: spamd: checking message
<[
On 30/12/2005 1:33 PM, Mabry Tyson wrote:
We keep occasionally (once a day or two) hitting an infinite loop in
spamd 3.1.0 where the process fails to terminate. We find that after a
while some resource is used up and the system stops accepting new spamd
connections. The process accumulates
On 30/12/2005 9:45 AM, Jeff Chan wrote:
On Wednesday, December 28, 2005, 9:15:02 AM, Obantec Support wrote:
if i enable spamcop i find a lot of my ADSL customers (not on my IP's) are
blocked. i use sbl-xbl but the IP's so far seem to have gotten thru.
You could use something like smtp authen
First thanks for helping get the logging corrected and the daeomizing
set with -d.
Working on getting SA 3.1 working effectively here and I think I may
have some issues with it at this time in terms of it scanning all
incoming mail.
I'm running exim 3.36 here and have 4.60 ready to go if I can g
On 9-Jan-06, at 2:16 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
Jon Armitage wrote:
Vincent Li wrote:
I have been using SpamAssassin for quite a while, and used SARE rules
and other custom rules. I am interested in writing my own chinese
spam
rules to block chinese spam email.
I cheat and use an Exim acl s
On 9 Jan 2006, at 10:08 PM, Jon Armitage wrote:
Vincent Li wrote:
I have been using SpamAssassin for quite a while, and used SARE
rules and other custom rules. I am interested in writing my own
chinese spam rules to block chinese spam email.
I cheat and use an Exim acl statement to reject m
Jon Armitage wrote:
> Vincent Li wrote:
>
>> I have been using SpamAssassin for quite a while, and used SARE rules
>> and other custom rules. I am interested in writing my own chinese spam
>> rules to block chinese spam email.
>>
> I cheat and use an Exim acl statement to reject messages composed
Vincent Li wrote:
I have been using SpamAssassin for quite a while, and used SARE rules
and other custom rules. I am interested in writing my own chinese spam
rules to block chinese spam email.
I cheat and use an Exim acl statement to reject messages composed in
unwanted character sets. Howev
Hi list:
I have been using SpamAssassin for quite a while, and used SARE rules and other custom rules. I am interested in writing my own chinese spam rules to block chinese spam email.
I found chinese rules at http://www.ccert.edu.cn/spam/sa/Chinese_rules.cf
and http://www.geewhiz.ca/images/b/
Robert Bartlett writes:
Ok I confused myself. Im sorry for being an idiot. I get it now. Everytime
an email comes in it tries to access it as the user, since bayes is being
feed to just the root account it doesn't see anything for the users in
bayes. With the override I force it to use the root
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 2:05 PM
> To: Matthew Yette
> Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: rules better than bayes?
>
> [snip]
>
> I also strongly recommend enabling SA's URIBL support, and
> addin
Ok I confused myself. Im sorry for being an idiot. I get it now. Everytime
an email comes in it tries to access it as the user, since bayes is being
feed to just the root account it doesn't see anything for the users in
bayes. With the override I force it to use the root account for all emails
comi
Hello Guys,
I have installed SA 3.1.0 and, after some tweaking on rules, I
noticed that i had SEVERAL warning on --lint tests. After some
researching, I discovered that i had several FUZZY and SUBJECT_FUZZY
rules giving errors, something like score for rule that doesnt exists.
Some mor
Sorry for the confusion, I do use a site wide bayes database, I thought the
information I sent below was the site wide information the system uses to
access the bayes database.
Thanks
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 1
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> This is what I have in my local.cf file:
>
> bayes_store_module Mail::SpamAssassin::BayesStore::SQL
> bayes_sql_dsnDBI:mysql:**:localhost:3306
> bayes_sql_username
> bayes_sql_password
This is what I have in my local.cf file:
bayes_store_module Mail::SpamAssassin::BayesStore::SQL
bayes_sql_dsnDBI:mysql:**:localhost:3306
bayes_sql_username
bayes_sql_password
Obviously I hid the d
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> Interesting, I did that just to see how mine were doing and the BAYES one
> returned 0? Does that mean bayes is not being used? I have been feeding
> emails to bayes and in debug mode it shows bayes being used. I am using
> bayes in a mysql. Just weird that its showing 0.
>
wrote:
> I have since taken bayes out as I get WAY better results without it.
If it doesn't work for you, don't use it. The rules and network tests
work pretty well. Especially if you add some SARE rules into the mix.
However...
> The reason this happens to me is that I get to many spam
Interesting, I did that just to see how mine were doing and the BAYES one
returned 0? Does that mean bayes is not being used? I have been feeding
emails to bayes and in debug mode it shows bayes being used. I am using
bayes in a mysql. Just weird that its showing 0.
Robert
-Original Message--
Matthew Yette wrote:
>
> Do you recommend running airmax as a supplementary ruleset with 3.1.0?
I personally have no recommendations on it.. I've never run it.
I personally like SARE's specific, evilnumbers, random and adult rulesets.
Here's some quick grep's for hit-rates on some SARE rules I
Do you recommend running airmax as a supplementary ruleset with 3.1.0?
This is just my humble opinion, but I don't know if that's a ruleset I would
use in production for a multi-user server. A few of the rules use the
"f-word" in the rule description line, so it would go out in a verbose
repo
Matthew Yette wrote:
Correction, airmax.cf is not one single rule, it's one single FILE containing
211 rules. That's a significant difference, given that the stock spamassassin
3.1.0 has about 723 rules.
Airmax has increased the number of rules in your system by 29.1%
Do you recommend
Matt Kettler a écrit :
>
>
> Realistically, I don't know why your hit rates are so low. They shouldn't be
> so
> bad that you're only detecting 2 or 3 out of every hundred.
>
> You could have some configuration problems, but I can't tell as you've not
> told
> us anything about your system, ju
I have since taken bayes out as I get WAY better results without it. The
reason this happens to me is that I get to many spam
mailings that poison the db and I end up with allot of spam that shows up as a
Bayes_00. I use all the Network tests but I get
allot of spam that has not been added yet.
On 1/9/06 2:43 PM, "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> jo3 wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is an observation, please take it in the spirit in which it is
>> intended, it is not meant to be flame bait.
>>
>> After using spamassassin for six solid months, it seems to me that the
>> bayes proce
jo3 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is an observation, please take it in the spirit in which it is
> intended, it is not meant to be flame bait.
>
> After using spamassassin for six solid months, it seems to me that the
> bayes process (sa-learn [--spam | --ham]) has only very limited success
> in learning
Well, scratch that on IE 6.0, but it definitely happens in Firefox 1.5 with no
extensions installed.
I can watch Firefox try .com for any unknown URL before returning an error.
I've tested this on 4 machines to be sure.
We do not use any proxies.
Either way, as you said lots of people will ty
Hi,
This is an observation, please take it in the spirit in which it is
intended, it is not meant to be flame bait.
After using spamassassin for six solid months, it seems to me that the
bayes process (sa-learn [--spam | --ham]) has only very limited success
in learning about new spam. Rega
Kristopher Austin a écrit :
> Well, to make matters interesting, Outlook makes www.rektoky a
> hyperlink. Click on it and IE and Firefox will both add the .com.
> Voila! You have a spam address that makes it through every time.
>
not here. what versions of IE and firefox are you using? Both ret
Nix a écrit :
> One of the goals in _A Plan for Spam_ has certainly been achieved: the
> spammers are having to obfuscate their dubious `messages' so much that
> they no longer make any great degree of sense.
>
actually, most (naive) users will add .com either because they
"understood" (the messa
I keep receiving stock spam that looks like the one below. I was sure I
had same SARE rules that were supposed to catch this, but maybe not.
Any suggestions?
We're working on a set of stock rules. RSN, I hope.
Loren
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Robert Bartlett wrote:
> > >
> > > The problem is the original email is not attached, they just forward
> > > it to me. Is there a way to just feed the body of the message
> > > instead of the he
-Original Message-
From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 10:48 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Feeding Bayes Forwarded Emails
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Robert Bartlett wrote:
> > > I
Steven Manross skrev:
> 90% of the way down... (the following command throws errors -- %%f was
> unexpected at this time)
>
> for %%f in (*.*) do call pod2html %%f --outfile
> \perl\html\site\lib\mail\spamassassin\plugins\%%f.html --quiet
>
> s/b
>
> for %f in (*.*) do call pod2html %f --outfi
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Robert Bartlett wrote:
> > > If someone forwards me email as a regular forward and not as an
> > > attachment, could I still feed it to bayes as the user who forwarded
> > > it to me and still be effective? Or will that cause
>On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 09:36:04 -0500, you wrote:
>At 07:33 AM 1/9/2006, George R. Kasica wrote:
>
>>Here you go:
>>
>>/usr/local/bin/spamd --local -u spamd -m 5 --max-conn-per-child=50 &
>
>
>Ditch the &, and add a -d instead.
>
>spamd will start logging to syslog if you tell it to daemonize, inste
This was apready pointed out to me.. And I'll be re-editing the page to
reflect this part I did not know until 2 people pointed it out to me.
Thanks.
Steven
> Would anyone with access update the WIKI for Windows, please?
As noted before, ANYONE can sign up and update the wiki. It's community
documentation and being part of the community helps it to stay accurate.
But...
>
> Namely,
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/InstallingOnWindows
>
> 90%
> Would anyone with access update the WIKI for Windows, please?
> Namely,
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/InstallingOnWindows
> 90% of the way down... (the following command throws errors
> -- %%f was
> unexpected at this time)
>
> for %%f in (*.*) do call pod2html %%f --outfile
> \perl\
Steven, anyone can update the wiki, you just have to have an account.
Just create an account and click edit. At least that seems to have
worked for me.
Kris
-Original Message-
From: Steven Manross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 10:10 AM
To: spamassassin-users
S
Well, to make matters interesting, Outlook makes www.rektoky a
hyperlink. Click on it and IE and Firefox will both add the .com.
Voila! You have a spam address that makes it through every time.
Kris
Sent to Nix only previously, meant to send this to the list.
-Original Message-
From: N
Would anyone with access update the WIKI for Windows, please?
Namely,
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/InstallingOnWindows
90% of the way down... (the following command throws errors -- %%f was
unexpected at this time)
for %%f in (*.*) do call pod2html %%f --outfile
\perl\html\site\lib\ma
On Sun, 8 Jan 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] announced authoritatively:
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
===8<---
Make it happen!
Here : www.rektoky ,ohya add .com ^_^
===8<---
[...]
> Well Raymond. it's no good if it's listed in uribl if the url does not
> parse as a url. That's the poi
-Original Message-
From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 8:30 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Feeding Bayes Forwarded Emails
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> If someone forwards me email as a regular forward and not as an
> attachment, c
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> If someone forwards me email as a regular forward and not as an
> attachment, could I still feed it to bayes as the user who forwarded
> it to me and still be effective? Or will that cause problems because
> the headers show as the person forwarding the email and not the
>
If someone forwards me email as a regular forward and not as an attachment,
could I still feed it to bayes as the user who forwarded it to me and still
be effective? Or will that cause problems because the headers show as the
person forwarding the email and not the original headers?
What I mean ab
Hello all,
To start off, I'm running FreeBSD 4.7, SpamAssassin 3.1.0_5 all on a
default install (only args are -d -r /var/run/spamd/spamd.pid).
After I start spamd (via /usr/local/etc/rc.d/sa-spam.sh start), I did
a ps -aux and saw the following;
root 91555 1.9 0.6 22628 22140 ?? Ss
At 07:33 AM 1/9/2006, George R. Kasica wrote:
Here you go:
/usr/local/bin/spamd --local -u spamd -m 5 --max-conn-per-child=50 &
Ditch the &, and add a -d instead.
spamd will start logging to syslog if you tell it to daemonize, instead of
starting it in console mode and forcing it to the ba
FYI, This doesn't happen with SA 3.0.4
George
>On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 06:33:00 -0600, you wrote:
>>On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:10:48 -0500, you wrote:
>
>>At 02:45 PM 1/8/2006, George R. Kasica wrote:
>>>I've noticed that since going to exim 4.60 and SA 3.1 that I'm getting
>>>alot of logging to my scr
>On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:10:48 -0500, you wrote:
>At 02:45 PM 1/8/2006, George R. Kasica wrote:
>>I've noticed that since going to exim 4.60 and SA 3.1 that I'm getting
>>alot of logging to my screen rather than into log files on the server
>>from either spamd or exim (I'm thinking spamd) and I'm w
59 matches
Mail list logo
