I'm getting this spamd error in the maillogs and I have AWL turned off.
We're also using vpopmail and have the following spamd starting parameters:
SPAMDOPTIONS="-d -c -m5 -H -q -u vpopmail"
Can anyone tell me what we're doing wrong?
Feb 4 02:33:24 libra spamd[2948]: auto-whitelist: open o
Hi,
I want to write a personal rule to match recipients of a particular
domain
The rule I am using now is
header __TO_DOMAIN_NETToCc =~ /[EMAIL PROTECTED]/i
But the above rule would match "@domain.net" as well as
"@domain.net.in"
Which is the best way to match only @domain.net and not
Hi.
I just joined the list, and I do a little peripheral work with
Mimedefang and Thunderbird, sendmail, etc.
In working with MdF, the following issue came up. We're running
SpamAssassin 3.0.4, Mimedefang 2.55, Perl 5.8.5, and Sendmail
8.13.1... all on Redhat FC3 (on an Athalon 64).
(1) Is th
Mathias Homann wrote:
Hi folks,
since i've been running spamassassin, and doing daily logfile stats
via spamstats.pl 0.6b, I was used to getting somewhat near 50% spam
(meaning, half of around 500 mails per day were tagged as spam by
spamassassin), but lately, maybe since a month or so, the
I've been getting about 50% more spam in the last month. It's almost all
getting caught, but I have real aggessive rules and scoring. Even with that
I've had about 5 FNs in the last month, and that is more than I've had in
the last year!
Loren
Hi folks,
since i've been running spamassassin, and doing daily logfile stats
via spamstats.pl 0.6b, I was used to getting somewhat near 50% spam
(meaning, half of around 500 mails per day were tagged as spam by
spamassassin), but lately, maybe since a month or so, the daily
percentage has dr
I'm using a script to pipe messages to spamc. Out of about
90,000 messages passed to spamc via the script about 7,000
failed with an error code of 74.
What does spamc mean by EX_IOERR?
Is this a failure between my script and spamc or something
else?
=
Kevin W. Gag
Well I just did a sa-learn --clear
and then sa-learn --ham
and sa-learn --spam
on ~5000-6000 spam and ham messages... will find out Monday morning when I
come back in and look at my mailbox if that helped any.
I appreciate the responses from everybody.
-Jeff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Orig
We're running spamassassin 3.0.2 with perl 5.8.4, and exim 3.35 on
Debian.
<> Don't wipe out SA, necessarily. It's not time to do that yet.
But it is time to update to 3.0.5, at least. 3.0.2 has a DoS
vulnerability.
<>That's not an option unless you get away from Debian packages.
Cla
We're running spamassassin 3.0.2 with perl 5.8.4, and exim 3.35 on Debian.
<> Don't wipe out SA, necessarily. It's not time to do that yet.
But it is time to update to 3.0.5, at least. 3.0.2 has a DoS vulnerability.
That's not an option unless you get away from Debian packages. Installing
From: "Dallas L. Engelken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-Original Message-
From: jdow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: "Dallas L. Engelken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: Gene Heskett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> And if you can find it on SARE, it was invisible when I looked last
> night.
>
You
From: "Jeff Portwine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello... I am a complete newbie with Spamassassin, so I hope you will all bear with me.
The job of fixing our spam filter has fallen on me, as the person who used to handle
everything relating to our mail server recently left my company.
We're runnin
> -Original Message-
> From: jdow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 3:44 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Post your top 10 from sa-stats
>
> From: "Dallas L. Engelken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > From: Gene Heskett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
From: "Dallas L. Engelken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Gene Heskett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
And if you can find it on SARE, it was invisible when I
looked last night.
You must not read follow-up posts very well. See Chris Purves post
which followed up your "I cant find it" post.
Or to m
From: "Ole Nomann Thomsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Thanks Matt, Ed, Ruben, Nicklas, Patrick, jdow, Chis et.al. for all the
replies, you can stop sending them now, unless you get far below one. At
least I now know for sure that I'm stumped :-)
For the record: I have no bayes_ignore anywhere, and I d
Jason, I forgot to add the domainkeys_timeout config option in bug 4781.
There's a 3.1 patch to add a domainkeys_timeout config option at:
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4782
Daryl
Don't see much to complain about with your local.cf, other than the two
obvious 2.6x lines that weren't updated. As others have mentioned, taking
the autolearn ham threshold down to 0 or -0.1 would be a real good idea.
I'm not sure about those last two add_header lines. I'm assuming that is
somet
Despite the message subject I wouldn't say your SA install is *very* broken,
only unmaintained and somewhat broken. One would expect that an
unmaintained filter would let more spam through with time. SPam patterns
change as the spammers get better at avoiding old blocks, so we have to
invent new
Someone else was recently saying (or maybe its even in Bugzilla) that they
see Bayes hit sometimes and not others when they think it should. This
might be the first indication though that it is hitting randomly on the
*same message*.
Sounds like it would be worth trying to figure out why.
Jason, there's a 3.1 patch to add an spf_timeout config option at:
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4781
For some reason Bugzilla wouldn't let me add your email address to the
cc: list.
Daryl
In the last 3 weeks or so , we have started receiving a ton of spam,
especially a lot of pharmeceutical adds and some other random nonsense.
However, Spamassassin isn't completely broken.. it is actually catching
some spam but it's letting a lot go. When I look at the headers in the
spam, I
Take a look in the SpamAssassin config directory (usually
/etc/mail/spamassassin), and show us which rulesets have been added.
You may have some old rulesets that are no longer needed and there are
probably some extra rulesets that you could add.
Thanks a lot for the responses, here is a copy
Jeff Portwine wrote:
>
> We're running spamassassin 3.0.2 with perl 5.8.4, and exim 3.35 on
> Debian.
You may want to upgrade to 3.1. There have been a bunch of improvements
recently.
> Here are the SA related headers for a couple of spams that are
> getting through:
> X-Virus-Scanned: by ama
> Hello... I am a complete newbie with Spamassassin, so I hope you will all
> bear with me. The job of fixing our spam filter has fallen on me, as the
> person who used to handle everything relating to our mail server recently
> left my company.
>
> We're running spamassassin 3.0.2 with perl 5.8
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
"Daryl C. W. O'Shea" writes:
> On 02/02/2006 10:50 PM, Jason Haar wrote:
> > I'm noticing a lot of SPF (and DK) lookups fail on our network (dbg:
> > spf: lookup timed out after 5 seconds) due to New Zealand being in the
> > wrong galaxy: Quite often,
Jeff Portwine wrote:
> We're running spamassassin 3.0.2 with perl 5.8.4, and exim 3.35 on
> Debian.
...
> At some point SA must have been updated with a
> apt-get update or something and the configuration file was not
> updated along with it.I'm not sure if this is the cause of the
> problem t
Hello... I am a complete newbie with
Spamassassin, so I hope you will all bear with me. The job of fixing
our spam filter has fallen on me, as the person who used to handle everything
relating to our mail server recently left my company.
We're running spamassassin 3.0.2 with perl
5.8.4,
Hi,
I never tried something like that, but
- if the visible link looks like an url and
- the actual and visible url's are not related in some way
(ideas: same ip, same netblock, subdomains of same domain)
- or if the actual link looks like two url's concatenated (potential open
redirector) and
Lately I have seen a number of SPAM messages with a sender in the form of:
<""@somedomain.whatever>
for example: <""@ipyub.com>
I'm not sure if this is intentional or simply broken ratware.
The ones, that I have seen, are primarily mortgage spam.
Does anyone see a problem with a rule to
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Jeremy Kister wrote:
> A few weeks ago i deleted my bayes_seen and bayes_toks files because
> bayes was behaving poorly.
>
> I have been working hard to retrain bayes, and have realized a problem:
> using sa-learn --dump magic, nham is stuck at 182.
>
> I can learn a use sa-lea
Ole Nomann Thomsen wrote:
> Hi, can I ask a small favor from some of you running SA with Bayes
> enabled: Please run the following perl-oneliner on your SA-log (mine
> is "current"):
>
> perl -ne 'if (/result:/) {$n++; $b++ if (/BAYES/);} } print
> $b/$n,"\n"; {' < current
>
> (I promise it's no
I have been having a problem with mail timing out, the queue filling up
on my FreeBSD 5.4 server with Amavisd-new 2.3.3 and SA 3.1.0. I restart
amavisd and all starts working again. Scanning the logs, the first error
I can find before the problem is below, then I start getting amavisd
read timeout
I have been having a problem with mail timing out, the queue filling up
on my FreeBSD 5.4 server with Amavisd-new 2.3.3 and SA 3.1.0. I restart
amavisd and all starts working again. Scanning the logs, the first error
I can find before the problem is below, then I start getting amavisd
read timeouts
Thanks Matt, Ed, Ruben, Nicklas, Patrick, jdow, Chis et.al. for all the
replies, you can stop sending them now, unless you get far below one. At
least I now know for sure that I'm stumped :-)
For the record: I have no bayes_ignore anywhere, and I don't believe I have
missed something in my setups.
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Purves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: Post your top 10 from sa-stats
John Fleming wrote:
Wrong tool. Visit http://www.rulesemporium.com/ and find the
sa-stats.pl on their site. It is the one most of
Ruben Cardenal wrote:
> 1
here too. 1.
- Nick.
1
-Ruben
El vie, 03-02-2006 a las 10:27 +0100, Ole Nomann Thomsen escribió:
Hi, can I ask a small favor from some of you running SA with Bayes enabled:
Please run the following perl-oneliner on your SA-log (mine is "current"):
perl -ne 'if (/result:/) {$n++; $b++ if (/BAYES/);} } print $b/
> -Original Message-
> From: Gene Heskett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 11:56 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Post your top 10 from sa-stats
>
> On Friday 03 February 2006 00:30, jdow wrote:
> >From: "John Fleming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 21:33 -0800, Loren Wilton wrote:
> > Re: infrangible Phharam aceutical
> > Re: dud Phharam aceutical
> > Re: tympanum Phharamaceutica l
> > Re: paraph Phharamaceu tical
> > Re: investigator Ph haramacy
>
> Someone was proposing rules the other day for mis-spelled pharm stuff.
Ole Nomann Thomsen wrote:
> Hi, can I ask a small favor from some of you running SA with Bayes enabled:
> Please run the following perl-oneliner on your SA-log (mine is "current"):
>
> perl -ne 'if (/result:/) {$n++; $b++ if (/BAYES/);} } print $b/$n,"\n"; {' <
> current
>
> (I promise it's not a
Ole Nomann Thomsen wrote:
Hi, can I ask a small favor from some of you running SA with Bayes enabled:
Please run the following perl-oneliner on your SA-log (mine is "current"):
perl -ne 'if (/result:/) {$n++; $b++ if (/BAYES/);} } print $b/$n,"\n"; {' <
current
(I promise it's not a rootkit :-)
Monty Ree wrote:
> Hello, all.
>
> I have read this site.
> http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.1.x/dist/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html
>
>
> and I would like to set like this.
>
> If a mail is sent from some ip range like (111.222.111.0/24),
> all mail score is -10. It would be similar to white
* Ole Nomann Thomsen wrote (03/02/06 09:27):
> Hi, can I ask a small favor from some of you running SA with Bayes enabled:
> Please run the following perl-oneliner on your SA-log (mine is "current"):
>
> perl -ne 'if (/result:/) {$n++; $b++ if (/BAYES/);} } print $b/$n,"\n"; {' <
> current
>
> (I
0.998502994011976
Op 3-feb-06, om 10:27 heeft Ole Nomann Thomsen het volgende geschreven:
Hi, can I ask a small favor from some of you running SA with Bayes
enabled:
Please run the following perl-oneliner on your SA-log (mine is
"current"):
perl -ne 'if (/result:/) {$n++; $b++ if (/BAYES/
Trusted networks is NOT a whitelist tool.
It simply tells SpamAassin what addresses it considers "trustworthy" in the
sense that it
will not forge headers.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Monty Ree" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello, all.
I have read this site.
http://spamassassin.apac
1
{^_^}On 10 weeks of mail logs "1". (You have something sincerely broken.)
- Original Message -
From: "Ole Nomann Thomsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi, can I ask a small favor from some of you running SA with Bayes enabled:
Please run the following perl-oneliner on your SA-log (mine
Hi, can I ask a small favor from some of you running SA with Bayes enabled:
Please run the following perl-oneliner on your SA-log (mine is "current"):
perl -ne 'if (/result:/) {$n++; $b++ if (/BAYES/);} } print $b/$n,"\n"; {' <
current
(I promise it's not a rootkit :-)
I get:
0.710109622411693
Hello, all.
I have read this site.
http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.1.x/dist/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html
and I would like to set like this.
If a mail is sent from some ip range like (111.222.111.0/24),
all mail score is -10.
It would be similar to whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So,
48 matches
Mail list logo
