On Sunday 06 August 2006 16:30, kalin mintchev wrote:
> hi all...
>
> last week we had a power outage and our mail sever went down with it. the
> spamd performance has been disappointing ever since. crap like "Re:
> veaooVzlAGRA" is passing through without a hitch. here is what spamd added
> to t
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 12:07:58AM -0400, Eric A. Hall wrote:
> Anybody written a rule that tests for empty text/plain, preferably only
> when a non-empty text/html or some other media-type is provided?
Sounds very similar to MPART_ALT_DIFF.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Deja Fu: The feeling t
Anybody written a rule that tests for empty text/plain, preferably only
when a non-empty text/html or some other media-type is provided?
Thanks
--
Eric A. Hallhttp://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
Dear Groupmembers,
Do we have any benchmark software for testing spamd/spamc load.
regards
Looking at an incredibly poorly formatted phish for Chase Bank, I find the
following stuff after the closing tag:
src="http://hostingprod.com/js_source/geov2.js";>
geovisit();
http://visit.webhosting.yahoo.com/visit
On 6-Aug-06, at 9:54 PM, Benu wrote:
On Sunday 06 August 2006 14:07, you wrote:
On 6-Aug-06, at 2:36 PM, Benu wrote:
On Sunday 06 August 2006 09:39, you wrote:
Unless you post real domains it is very difficult to help with SPF
questions. Since we cannot query your DNS, we can't determine
wh
An extra received line is generated by Sendmail's submit service when mimedefang calls stream_by_recipient, making headers that look like:Received: from vtn1.victoria.tc.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vtn1.victoria.tc.ca (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id k73LncS0012140 for <[EMAIL PROTECTE
hi all...
last week we had a power outage and our mail sever went down with it. the
spamd performance has been disappointing ever since. crap like "Re:
veaooVzlAGRA" is passing through without a hitch. here is what spamd added
to the headers:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-
From: "Magnus Holmgren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For that matter, how in would an IMAP MUA handle BCC?
{^_-}
In much the same way as when you send mail with sendmail -t, I suppose.
The MUA adds a Bcc field and the IMAP server removes it.
That means the IMAP server must communicate with two SMTP
| 2250 0733.com
| 1882 0451.com
| 89 072.com
| 62 006.com
| 58 1039.com
| 52 163.com
| 32 0668.com
| 31 004.com
| 19 126.com
| 13 mail.0451.com
|
| Panagiotis
Here are my numbers from last week:
5006 0451.com
3845 53.com
2253 0733.com
440 mail.0451.com
204 006.com
1
On Friday 04 August 2006 05:06, jdow took the opportunity to say:
> From: "Kenneth Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > --On Wednesday, August 02, 2006 12:02 PM -0700 MennovB
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > wrote:
> >> Anyway, IMHO with SYN throttle you would only be rate-limiting the
> >> zombies, I
Ollie,
thanks for the explanation... I was really looking at the wrong place.
Cheers,
Arik
Ollie Acheson wrote:
> Arik -
>
> I think the problem is one of understanding what is happening with the
> .qmail + ifspamh processing.
>
> The first line of .qmail invokes ifspamh with a copy of the emai
On Sun, 6 Aug 2006, Panagiotis Christias wrote:
> and not only them according to our daily sendmail logs:
>
> 2484 0733.com
> 2449 0451.com
...etc
I've also seen 0541.com in my logs.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZICQ#15735746http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]FALaholic #11174
Arik -
I think the problem is one of understanding what is happening with the
.qmail + ifspamh processing.
The first line of .qmail invokes ifspamh with a copy of the email on stdin.
ifspamh then invokes spamassassin and, if spam, delivers to the designated
spam destination and exits 99 so the .q
hi.
i've SA r429169 built from src on OSX 10.4.7.
i'm attemtpting to use/explore the sandbox's SendMailID.pm plugin.
to do so, as part of install, i've:
cp /usr/ports/spamassassin/rules/SendmailID.pm
/var/MailServer/Conf/SA/Dist/
and, in my init.pre, i've:
loadplugin Mail::SpamAss
and not only them according to our daily sendmail logs:
# egrep '@[0-9]+\.com' YESTERDAY | sed -e 's/^.*@//' -e 's/>.*$//' |
sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head
2484 0733.com
2449 0451.com
100 072.com
66 1039.com
52 006.com
51 0668.com
40 004.com
37 163.com
18 126.com
15 mail.0451.com
# egrep
I have SA set up to run per user, my question is does the user_prefs
file support any include commands like Apache's httpd.conf or Bind's
named.conf file does? I basically don't want to re-write the maing
user_prefs file when a user updates their White or Black lists via the
web interface I'm p
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] stipulated:
> From: "Nix" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, negativescore gibbered uncontrollably:
>>> Find a floppy disk. Format it. Move cpanel over to the floppy disk. Remove
>>> the floppy disk from the system. Wrap the floppy in
>>> alternati
Made some changes and waiting to see if it fixes it. Gotta wait for another
one of these annoying messages to come in.
I have a mailbox that accepts spam if the
address is bogus. How do I train sa-learn to user the spam mail box
as --spam and universally block such mail?
--
Member - Liberal International
This is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ici [EMAIL PROTECTED]
God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising!
Bew
Is it possible for spamc/d to be reading from a different set of
configuration files than spamassassin? If so, how can I determine this?
Sure. Usually if it is running under a different usercode.
You will have to figure out how you start spamd and see what parameters are
passed to it and wha
Is it possible for spamc/d to be reading from a different set of
configuration files than spamassassin? If so, how can I determine this?
Thanks...
Pat...
Unless you post real domains it is very difficult to help with SPF questions. Since we cannot query your DNS, we can't determine whether there are errors in the SPF record. On 5-Aug-06, at 4:29 PM, Benu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:I need help also, I am seeing the same messages. In /etc/mail/spama
Marc Perkel wrote:
> Maybe I missed something but I installed the gocr program and fedd it
> some stock spam files and the accuracy of what it read was really really
> poor - unusable. Is there something else I need to install?
I had the same experience. Have you tried feeding one of thos gi
Maybe I missed something but I installed the gocr program and fedd it
some stock spam files and the accuracy of what it read was really really
poor - unusable. Is there something else I need to install?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
> On 8/6/2006 7:50 AM, decoder wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hello there,
>>
>> I recently had the idea to write a plugin, which scans for
>> obfuscated words according to a given list of words,
On 8/6/2006 7:50 AM, decoder wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello there,
I recently had the idea to write a plugin, which scans for obfuscated
words according to a given list of words, which are often obfuscated
(to avoid simple word filters). Looking at most of my spam, s
Hi
I am new user to spamassassin , I am planning to
setup a high availability(redundancy ),Load Balancing
environment of spamassassin , I plan to user MySQL
as database for this purpose . After a lot of google
search I decided to follow the following steps.
Step 1 , Cluster M
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello there,
I recently had the idea to write a plugin, which scans for obfuscated
words according to a given list of words, which are often obfuscated
(to avoid simple word filters). Looking at most of my spam, spammers
seem to obfuscate always the s
On 8/6/2006 4:39 AM, Loren Wilton wrote:
Suggestions?
The obvious questions: did you restart spamd? (Or however you call SA?)
Were you running under the same usercode when you did the -D run as the
normal run?
Also note that if the rules are user rules, ie. in your
~/.spamassassin/user_p
Suggestions?
The obvious questions: did you restart spamd? (Or however you call SA?)
Were you running under the same usercode when you did the -D run as the
normal run?
I can't see any immediately obvious problem with the rules, so they *should*
work.
Loren
From: "Phill Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
My set up is:
- Fedora Core 5
- Postfix 2.2.8-1.2
- Spamassassin 3.1.3-1.fc5
- Procmail 3.22-16.2.1
- Fetchmail 6.3.4-0.fc5.1
I use fetchmail to get mail from all my different ISP mailboxes. These
then get delivered on my local machine by postfix which
I receive one of the image spams it was sent through spamassassin via
procmail and was came through with the following score and hits.
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.3 required=5.0 tests=CP_RANDOMWORD_10=0.5,
DATE_IN_FUTURE_12_24=2.767,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 autolearn=no
version=3.1.3
I have several loc
33 matches
Mail list logo
