On Wed, 31 May 2006, Thomas Bolioli wrote:
> I have included the mailing in it's entirety below. Is this an old trick
> I just have not seen or is this something new using mailman to send
> spam. I assure you I neither signed up nor confirmed a submission for
> this mailing list. Is this just a po
Philip Prindeville wrote:
> I was rereading the sections on "trusted_networks" and "internal_networks"
> in Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf, but something wasn't clear to me.
>
> It talks about MXes and relays, but... not about client workstations
> that might
> originate email locally and submit it via
I was rereading the sections on "trusted_networks" and "internal_networks"
in Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf, but something wasn't clear to me.
It talks about MXes and relays, but... not about client workstations
that might
originate email locally and submit it via port 25 or port 465 (and not the
typi
I have included the mailing in it's entirety below. Is this an old trick
I just have not seen or is this something new using mailman to send
spam. I assure you I neither signed up nor confirmed a submission for
this mailing list. Is this just a poorly configured mailman install?
Tom
Return-Pa
On Wed, 31 May 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 31 May 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 31 May 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
> > >
> > > Can you get output of
> > >
> > > strace -f -o trace
> > >
> > > on the affected processes? (easy way: just stop spamd, then strace the
> > >
for those that didn't see it, http://slashdot.org/ read "Google,
Submission AdSense and NoFollow Letdown". figured I'd toot his horn for
him. :)
was taint.org slashdotted for a bit? I couldn't seem to access it when
the article first appeared. Seems to come up fine now.
On the plus side the manual fix is pretty simple and now it's in the
lists it should make it a little easier for others to find a solution.
I wouldn't beat yourself up too much, if it was perfect every time
where would the entertainment value be? ;-)
KR
Nigel
On Wed, 31 May 2006 17:16:56 -0400,
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 03:09:55PM -0600, Gary V wrote:
> looks like there is a patch, and will be fixed in 3.1.3
> http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4932
Actually that patch doesn't fix the problem, assuming the user doesn't
have a ~/.spamassassin directory already and they're
I submitted a bug on this, or is this a "feature"?:
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4923
Gary V
looks like there is a patch, and will be fixed in 3.1.3
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4932
Hi All,
Problem resolved.
The creation of a dir /root/.spamassassin with a file user_prefs in it
has resolved the issue.
After adding the above it now lint's clean.
I'm not sure why it didn't get created at install - but at least now
it's fixed.
Nigel
I submitted a bug on this, or is this
Hi All,
Problem resolved.
The creation of a dir /root/.spamassassin with a file user_prefs in it
has resolved the issue.
After adding the above it now lint's clean.
I'm not sure why it didn't get created at install - but at least now
it's fixed.
Many thanks to James Rallo for his correct sugg
On Wed, 31 May 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 31 May 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
> >
> > Can you get output of
> >
> > strace -f -o trace
> >
> > on the affected processes? (easy way: just stop spamd, then strace the
> > spamd startup script.)
>
> Ok, that's going without any output as
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
>
> Can you get output of
>
> strace -f -o trace
>
> on the affected processes? (easy way: just stop spamd, then strace the
> spamd startup script.)
Ok, that's going without any output as of yet. I did notice from the
console log that a perl dumped co
Hi,
I've run in 3.1.2 on a test server before letting it loose live.
When running --lint -D I get the following output:
info: config: can not determine userstate dir
warn: config: could not find userprefs file
My SPAMDOPTIONS are set as:
SPAMDOPTIONS="-d -c -m5 -H -i0.0.0.0 -A192.168.2. -q -x -
Can you get output of
strace -f -o trace
on the affected processes? (easy way: just stop spamd, then strace the
spamd startup script.)
--j.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Wed, 31 May 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 31 May 2006, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, May 31
On Wed, 31 May 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 31 May 2006, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 11:12:03AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > > May 31 07:53:52 mail spamd[59117]: Use of uninitialized value in
> > > > > subtraction (-) at
> > > > /usr/local/lib/perl5/s
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ugh...I have seen some locking errors while I wasn't before. WOuld
> simply turning off auto-learning accomplish the same thing?
Possibly.
> If it needs to be turned off altogether, will just commenting out
> bayes_path in local.cf do it? I don't see any other referen
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 11:12:03AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > May 31 07:53:52 mail spamd[59117]: Use of uninitialized value in
> > > > subtraction (-) at
> > > /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/Locker/UnixNFSSafe.pm
>
On 31 May 2006 at 11:50, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 09:46:52AM -0600, Nels Lindquist wrote:
> > I tried upgrading from 3.1.1 to 3.1.2 today, but "spamassassin --
> > lint" turned up the following errors:
> >
> > [766] warn: config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BA
On Wed, 31 May 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing
> > that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests,
> > including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like there's an
> > issue.
>
> Is i
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 09:46:52AM -0600, Nels Lindquist wrote:
> I tried upgrading from 3.1.1 to 3.1.2 today, but "spamassassin --
> lint" turned up the following errors:
>
> [766] warn: config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_80
[...]
> 3.1.1). Is there some larger issue here? "
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 11:12:03AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > May 31 07:53:52 mail spamd[59117]: Use of uninitialized value in
> > > subtraction (-) at
> > /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/Locker/UnixNFSSafe.pm
> > > line 102, line 46.
Hrm. That's not good. Seem
Hi there.
I tried upgrading from 3.1.1 to 3.1.2 today, but "spamassassin --
lint" turned up the following errors:
[766] warn: config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_80
[766] warn: config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_95
[766] warn: config: warning: score set for
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing
> that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests,
> including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like there's an
> issue.
Is it possible that you're locking on a Bayes write? Try disa
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 31 May 2006, Bowie Bailey wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm
> > > noticing that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network
> > > tests, including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks li
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing
> > that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests,
> > including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like there's an
> > issue.
> >
> > I ra
On 5/31/06, Benny Pedersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
but should this not be more in postfix header check ?
does someone know if there is a set of rfc checks for postfix exists anywhere ?
Not possible with postfix header_checks. Header_checks cannot test
for the absence of a header, nor te
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing
> that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests,
> including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like there's an
> issue.
>
> I raised max children from 15 to 25, yet it still seems to
Dan wrote:
Thought you might enjoy this unintended peak at the construction of
randomized header variables:
(SMTPD32-8.15) id ACE84FB700A2; Wed, 31 May 2006 06:16:08 -0400
Received: from [221.7.214.83]
by
id 1FlNkA-00029J-ST
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 31 May 2006 03:16:05 -070
A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing that
it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests, including DCC,
Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like there's an issue.
I raised max children from 15 to 25, yet it still seems to be spending
most of it's time at 25,
Thought you might enjoy this unintended peak at the construction of
randomized header variables:
(SMTPD32-8.15) id ACE84FB700A2; Wed, 31 May 2006 06:16:08 -0400
Received: from [221.7.214.83]
by
id 1FlNkA-00029J-ST
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 31 May 2006 03:16:05 -07
>> header L_DOUBLE_SUBJECT ALL =~ /^Subject:.*^Subject:/smi
>> header L_DOUBLE_FROMALL =~ /^From:.*^From:/smi
>
> Doing some more research on my suggestion
> and evaluating results for the last three days, here is a proposal for new
> rule:
>
> http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cg
32 matches
Mail list logo
