I run SA 3.1.5 with MailScanner
I have in my cf file
bayes_learn_to_journal 1
use_bayes 1
bayes_path /var/spool/MailScanner/spamassassin/bayes
bayes_file_mode 0666
bayes_auto_expire 0
The problem is my bayes_journal file grows immensely ( around 500Mb a
day ) but the bayes_toks f
Hi.
Is there anyone has experience in using Apache james working together with
spamassassin to anti spam?my OS is linux Gentoo.I have read through the james
Doc and spamassassin Doc,however I can't find anything useful.Thanks in advance.
roger
2006-12-14
Marc Perkel wrote:
> From openspf.org
>
> http://old.openspf.org/aspen.html
>
Marc, this link is not describing SPF as an anti-spam technology. It's
describing how SPF can be coupled with an accreditation service to
create an anti-spam technology.
Nobody's saying SPF has no use in anti-spam, it ha
Am Donnerstag, 14. Dezember 2006 03:53 schrieb Matt Kettler:
> > Yep - they are using "normal" email technology.
>
> No they're not. They're falsifying mail headers. Something last I
> checked was actually illegal in the united states under CAN-SPAM.
and a russian criminal sitting in litavia, usi
--- Richard Ozer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Be careful about the content. If, for instance, you create a message
> that has only the word "test" in it, DCC will pick it up. Were you
> using short phrases or single words?
>
> I ran into the exact same thing yesterday when I was testing out
On 14/12/06 1:51 PM, "Albert E. Whale" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Target system is Mandriva 2007. Running Perl 5.8.8.
>
> I have been using SpamAssassin for quite a while. Today I encountered
> issues installing version 3.1.7. As strange as it is, it starts with
> the installation of the
On 14/12/06 1:51 PM, "Albert E. Whale" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Target system is Mandriva 2007. Running Perl 5.8.8.
>
> I have been using SpamAssassin for quite a while. Today I encountered
> issues installing version 3.1.7. As strange as it is, it starts with
> the installation of the
Gary W. Smith wrote:
> I’ve seen a sharp increase in our OB Ticker spam’s that consist of an
> image and some text. It passed the greylist just fine and was labeled
> as bayes_00.
>
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,EXTRA_MPART_TYPE,
>
> HTML_30_40,HTML_IMAGE_O
> % ps -ef | grep spamd
>ps: illegal option -- f
Hrm. What platform are you on? "ps -axwg", "ps -el" ?
well, what day/time is it?
at the moment, MacOSXServer. during the day, usually an OpenSuSE or
FreeBSD box.
Anyway, you could also look at using a pid file. Tell spamd when startin
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 09:05:39PM -0800, snowcrash+spamassassin wrote:
> not sure what you're looking for here, but,
>
> % ps -ef | grep spamd
>ps: illegal option -- f
Hrm. What platform are you on? "ps -axwg", "ps -el" ?
Anyway, you could also look at using a pid file. Tell spamd when
Hrm. There's no parent in that output.
Try "ps -ef | grep spamd" and see what happens.
not sure what you're looking for here, but,
% ps -ef | grep spamd
ps: illegal option -- f
> kills the two child processes, which then immediately restart.
Yeah, you need to deal with the parent, not
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 08:55:26PM -0800, Gary W. Smith wrote:
> The image contained the OB stock ticker and the text was random, but
> coherent sentences. What's the best course of action to block these
> now. I'm running a couple rules from SARE. Are there some specific
> ones that will help o
Be careful about the content. If, for instance, you create a message that has
only the word "test" in it, DCC will pick it up. Were you using short phrases
or single words?
I ran into the exact same thing yesterday when I was testing out a new SA box,
and that was the cause.
RO
- Ori
I haven't been watching the list much lately so I apologize if this
topic has been kicked to death.
I've seen a sharp increase in our OB Ticker spam's that consist of an
image and some text. It passed the greylist just fine and was labeled
as bayes_00.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.5 required=5.
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 08:18:37PM -0800, snowcrash+spamassassin wrote:
> ps -ax | grep -i spamd
> 922 ?? S 0:00.18 spamd child
> 923 ?? S 0:00.14 spamd child
> 24006 p1 R+ 0:00.01 grep -i spamd
Hrm. There's no parent in that output.
Try "ps -ef |
after launching spamd (31x branch, r486953) with,
spamd --daemonize --nouser-config --allow-tell
--allowed-ips=192.168.1.10,127.0.0.1 --listen-ip=127.0.0.1 --port=783
> /var/log/spamd.log &
i see only,
ps -ax | grep -i spamd
922 ?? S 0:00.18 spamd child
On Wednesday 13 December 2006 11:35 am, Bret Miller wrote:
> Has anyone here tried MSRBL (http://www.msrbl.com/site/)? I'm running it
> in trial now, but thought I'd ask to see if anyone here had an opinion
> before doing anything serious with it.
>
> TIA,
> Bret
Bret, on my home system I use the
I'd say make sure you have something newer than that and try it again. If you
still have problems, please reopen bug 5052 w/ the Text::Wrap and SA versions.
yup. too old.
i'm co'ing current @ (Revision: 486953) which should do the trick.
thanks.
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 07:11:50PM -0800, snowcrash+spamassassin wrote:
> where it's noted that the bug was reported to the TextWrap author.
> anyone have a bug reference for the issue @ TextWrap?
If you follow from the wiki page to the bugzilla listing, there's a link to
the Text::Wrap RT entry:
i've come across this issue,
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/TextWrapError
where it's noted that the bug was reported to the TextWrap author.
is this being followed up one at all by anyone here?
anyone have a bug reference for the issue @ TextWrap?
thanks.
i have
spamassassin --version
SpamAssassin version 3.1.8-r454679
running on Perl version 5.8.8
in my debug-level spamd log i see frequently repeating instances of,
Wed Dec 13 18:36:13 2006 [923] dbg: prefork: periodic ping from spamd parent
Wed
Marc Perkel wrote:
>
>
> Matt Kettler wrote:
>>
>> Mark, SPF isn't an anti-spam technology. Anyone who says it is, is an
>> imbecile. SPF is an anti-forgery technology. Those who continue to think
>> of SPF purely as a spam control technology are doomed to be disappointed
>> and/or endlessly make p
The Target system is Mandriva 2007. Running Perl 5.8.8.
I have been using SpamAssassin for quite a while. Today I encountered
issues installing version 3.1.7. As strange as it is, it starts with
the installation of the following CPAN Module:
perl -MCPAN -e 'install ExtUtils::MakeMaker'
Can
René Berber wrote:
[snip]
> What I don't understand is what is Botnet doing for about 60 to 80 seconds,
> where I pointed out that it stoped. To be clear, I ran the test 3 times and
> it
> always stopped, so it was no glitch, or temporary problem.
Perhaps it was, I just re-ran the test and it to
Marc Perkel wrote:
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
So - if you use it for whitelisting - how do you distinguish a good
sender using SPF and a spammer using SPF? Wouldn't you be
whitelisting spam?
A good sender is someone or an organization I know I want to receive
mail from.
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm not the one who started this discussion. I did change the subject
line when the pro SPF lobby entered my other thread and moved it off
the topic I was talking about.
Right, I forgot. Your original topic was about securing consumer
networks
Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm not the one who started this discussion. I did change the subject
line when the pro SPF lobby entered my other thread and moved it off the
topic I was talking about.
Right, I forgot. Your original topic was about securing consumer
networks, something that is way off t
> > Has anyone here tried MSRBL (http://www.msrbl.com/site/)?
> I'm running
> > it in trial now, but thought I'd ask to see if anyone here had an
> > opinion before doing anything serious with it.
>
> I ran it here for a few hours with rblsmtpd and it got 0 hits, which
> also means 0 FP's on a very
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
OK Daryl,
How do you deal with people forwarding email from another domain when
using SPF?
Marc, please stop for a moment and make sure you have a clear picture
of what you're trying to achieve by this debate which is really close
to turning i
John Rudd wrote:
> René Berber wrote:
>> John Rudd wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> It can be downloaded from:
>>>
>>> http://people.ucsc.edu/~jrudd/spamassassin/Botnet.tar
>>>
>>> As usual, feedback, statistics, bug reports, feature suggestions, are
>>> all welcome.
>> [snip]
>>
>> Botnet 0.6 causes a timeo
Evan Platt wrote:
> I hope someone here can help, I've looked at the FuzzyOCR wiki and can't
> seem to find an answer..
>
> Is there a way to feed a GIF to FuzzyOCR and 'see' the output ?
No. FuzzyOcr is a plugin not a standalone application, if you want to test a
gif or other image you have to
Marc Perkel wrote:
OK Daryl,
How do you deal with people forwarding email from another domain when
using SPF?
Marc, please stop for a moment and make sure you have a clear picture of
what you're trying to achieve by this debate which is really close to
turning into a big flame war. If you
Marc Perkel wrote:
Second - tell it to everyone here who is suggesting that SPF is a spam
solution of some sort.
Oddly enough, the people who seem to be most adamant in stating that SPF
is a spam solution are those like yourself who consider it useless.
Those who find it useful seem to think
From: Ken A [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
> > From: Ken A [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Just add 10 to a test that matches everything, then subtract 10 for
> >> being in the U.S.
> >
> > Yeah. And keep 10 for canada, mexico and south america...
> >
> > You're beginni
Richard Frovarp wrote:
>
> Make sure you are running a local caching name server. Even with a
> real name server on the same subnet, I have heard of massive delays in
> DNS lookups as a result. This in turn causes a massive slowdown in the
> processing of mail.
You are absolutely correct. However -
From: Marc Perkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> OK Daryl,
>
> How do you deal with people forwarding email from another domain when
> using SPF?
Right. That's the big reason for using +all (or not using SPF at all).
Using +all means to me: "Look, I - the postmaster - I'm aware of SPF, but
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
From: Ken A [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just add 10 to a test that matches everything, then subtract 10 for
being in the U.S.
Yeah. And keep 10 for canada, mexico and south america...
You're beginning to speak alone, isn't it?
Well, the way I look at it, if you ar
OK Daryl,
How do you deal with people forwarding email from another domain when
using SPF?
Bookworm wrote:
I think I can say that even as a casual user of the list (I only take
care of about 10 smaller mail systems), I find the discussions more
useful than not. I would have little to no use for the direct SPF
mailing list - but in so far as it applies to anti-spam, I'm more than
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 01:31:44AM +0100, vertito wrote:
> this is a repost:
> body MY_harsh_content_RULE18/cid:/is
... and myself and some others have already responded to you. It's not a
useful rule in and of itself, but body isn't going to work. The easiest thing
to do is use sa-upda
Hm. I don't see anything wrong with that domain. I'll look into it.
Carlos Horowicz wrote:
Hi John,
the IP Address is 64.76.24.252 and the domain is comintec.net , Botnet
version is 0.6 under SA 3.1.7
THanks,
-Carlos
John Rudd wrote:
I would have to know the IP address of the rel
this is a repost:
I have this rule from local.cf
body MY_harsh_content_RULE18/cid:/is
describe MY_harsh_content_RULE18Harsh body content
score MY_harsh_content_RULE18 5.0
but still I am receiving this HTML spam emails that scores lower than 2.0.
The ae above rules doesnt
Marc Perkel wrote:
> "SPF is not anti-spam in the same way that flour is not food: it is part of
> the solution."
>
> The solution - to what? SPAM!
"part of the solution", not "the solution". Big difference.
Controlling forgeries is just one step at taking one of the tools out of
the tool bag.
On 13-Dec-06, at 6:38 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
From openspf.org
http://old.openspf.org/aspen.html
What's your point? Did you bother reading the article. It talks
about accreditation and reputation and only uses spam as an example.
You saw a couple of graphics that say spam and ham and now
Hi John,
the IP Address is 64.76.24.252 and the domain is comintec.net , Botnet
version is 0.6 under SA 3.1.7
THanks,
-Carlos
John Rudd wrote:
I would have to know the IP address of the relay in order to give a
meaningful answer. Just the 0 shouldn't have been enough. Though, if
on
Robert Blayzor wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
From openspf.org
http://old.openspf.org/aspen.html
Also from the SPF FAQ:
"Sender Policy Framework (SPF) is an attempt to control forged e-mail.
SPF is not directly about stopping spam – junk email. It is about giving
domain owners a way to
I would have to know the IP address of the relay in order to give a
meaningful answer. Just the 0 shouldn't have been enough. Though, if
one of the octets is 0, and you're using an older version of botnet, it
might have matched that one octet twice. That's a bug I'm pretty sure I
fixed in
John Rudd wrote:
Spam Assassin wrote:
Why was this topic not started on the SPF list? Was the original
poster of
this topic looking to get MORE attention on the SpamAssassin list?
Whether you and the other amateur-topic-police* like it or not, the
subject is related to the more general subj
Jason Haar wrote:
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 03:35:30PM -0600, Mike French wrote:
Do these normally timeout or do they need to be removed from a rule? I'm
thinking they are timed out because nothing was found?
The problem is likely related to your nam
Marc Perkel wrote:
Justin Mason wrote:
Marc --
Please pay attention to what Matt wrote yesterday. Repeat: SPF is *NOT*
for catching spam. It works great at what we use it for in SpamAssassin
-- as an authentication mechanism, to detect legit ham and whitelist it.
This is what you use authe
Duncan Hill wrote:
On Monday 11 December 2006 16:16, John Rudd wrote:
Duncan Hill wrote:
I just finished a very quick test of the Botnet tool, and the sheer
number of FPs against eBy mail coming from eBay's servers was staggering
- literally every single mail from eBay. It also, for my testing
I hope someone here can help, I've looked at the FuzzyOCR wiki and
can't seem to find an answer..
Is there a way to feed a GIF to FuzzyOCR and 'see' the output ?
ie let's say I have a GIF which has "THIS STOCK WILL EXPLODE
TOMORROW!" but there's some background noise to attempt to obfuscate it
Marc Perkel wrote:
> From openspf.org
>
> http://old.openspf.org/aspen.html
Also from the SPF FAQ:
"Sender Policy Framework (SPF) is an attempt to control forged e-mail.
SPF is not directly about stopping spam – junk email. It is about giving
domain owners a way to say which mail sources are le
Hi list,
I came across an e-mail originating at a customer domain hosted in a
dedicated server provided by my company, whose outgoing relay and
incoming MX are the same, namely mx0., and that Botnet in my
server tagged with:
BOTNET=5, BOTNET_CLIENT=0.01, BOTNET_IPINHOSTNAME=0.01
The onl
Marc Perkel wrote:
Justin Mason wrote:
Marc Perkel writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sounds good,
I found this an interesting read about why SPF is ineffective:
http://en.hakin9.org/products/articleInfo/102
Excellent article.
SPF catches no spam - but does create false positi
On 14 dec 2006, at 00.38, Marc Perkel wrote:
From openspf.org
http://old.openspf.org/aspen.html
This is a description of something that you could conceivably build
on top of SPF.
What is your point?
j o a r
From openspf.org
http://old.openspf.org/aspen.html
Justin Mason wrote:
Marc Perkel writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sounds good,
I found this an interesting read about why SPF is ineffective:
http://en.hakin9.org/products/articleInfo/102
Excellent article.
SPF catches no spam - but does create false positives. It's less than
Bret Miller wrote:
Has anyone here tried MSRBL (http://www.msrbl.com/site/)? I'm running it
in trial now, but thought I'd ask to see if anyone here had an opinion
before doing anything serious with it.
I ran it here for a few hours with rblsmtpd and it got 0 hits, which
also means 0 FP's on a
Am Mittwoch, 13. Dezember 2006 23:40 schrieb Theo Van Dinter:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 10:39:08PM +0100, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ spamassassin -D --lint 2>&1 |grep bayes
> > debug: config: read file /usr/share/spamassassin/23_bayes.cf
> > debug: bayes: 18897 tie-ing to DB file
Marc Perkel wrote:
> SPF catches no spam - but does create false positives. It's less than
> useless. It's dangerous.
SPF's job is not to catch spam, period! No matter how many times you
claim it's supposed to "catch spam", you could never be more wrong.
It's sole purpose is to allow domain owne
From: Ken A [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Just add 10 to a test that matches everything, then subtract 10 for
> being in the U.S.
Yeah. And keep 10 for canada, mexico and south america...
You're beginning to speak alone, isn't it?
giampaolo
> Ken A.
> Pacific.Net
>
> Robert Swan wrote:
> > Let'
René Berber wrote:
John Rudd wrote:
[snip]
It can be downloaded from:
http://people.ucsc.edu/~jrudd/spamassassin/Botnet.tar
As usual, feedback, statistics, bug reports, feature suggestions, are
all welcome.
[snip]
Botnet 0.6 causes a timeout while MA is running SA on a DSN message.
It lo
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 03:35:30PM -0600, Mike French wrote:
>
>> Do these normally timeout or do they need to be removed from a rule? I'm
>> thinking they are timed out because nothing was found?
>>
>
> The problem is likely related to your name servers. There sho
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, vertito wrote:
> I have this rule from local.cf
>
> body MY_harsh_content_RULE18/cid:/is
> describe MY_harsh_content_RULE18Harsh body content
> score MY_harsh_content_RULE18 5.0
>
> but still I am receiving this HTML spam emails that scores lower than 2.0.
>
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 03:35:30PM -0600, Mike French wrote:
> Do these normally timeout or do they need to be removed from a rule? I'm
> thinking they are timed out because nothing was found?
The problem is likely related to your name servers. There should always
be a response, even if it's "not
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 10:39:08PM +0100, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ spamassassin -D --lint 2>&1 |grep bayes
> debug: config: read file /usr/share/spamassassin/23_bayes.cf
> debug: bayes: 18897 tie-ing to DB file R/O /home/rd/.spamassassin/bayes_toks
> debug: bayes: 18897 tie-ing t
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 04:47:53PM -0500, Robert Swan wrote:
> Might want to check your local.cf file for:
> use_bayes 1
that's the default, so there's no point in setting it unless you want to
disable it.
--
Randomly Selected Tagline:
Professor: I've been a Harold Zoid fan since
Martin von Gagern wrote:
Hello!
I've been using SpamAssassin here for some time now, and haven't done
much configuration. Procmail calls spamassassin on my Gentoo Linux box,
configured without bayes but with network checks.
Configure your trusted_networks.
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/
Robert Swan wrote:
Let's say I wanted to score everything but the US. Do I have to write
rule for every country or is there an easier way?
Despite me thinking that that is a horrible idea, probably because you
wouldn't get this message if my primary out-mx is down, you could just
use a meta r
Thomas Bolioli wrote:
You are speaking for me... This became a very relevant topic when the
spf tests were packaged with SA by default. As someone who is having a
major issue with spf, it is very important that those making these
decisions here about the issues that most are having with SPF. I
Martin von Gagern wrote:
Jason Little wrote:
Just fire it through your ISP's mail server. They should be able to relay
for you without a problem.
Jason
Why would things look any different if I use my ISP instead of my IMP
(Mail Provider)? I'll check this week, but I'm not conviced y
On 13 dec 2006, at 15.21, Marc Perkel wrote:
True - SPF his hopelessly broken and must die.
Not so. It does exactly what it sets out to do. That it allows you to
specify that messages for fraud.com can be sent from any IP-address,
doesn't change the fact that it's a very concrete advantag
John Rudd wrote:
Spam Assassin wrote:
Why was this topic not started on the SPF list? Was the original
poster of
this topic looking to get MORE attention on the SpamAssassin list?
Whether you and the other amateur-topic-police* like it or not, the
subject is related to the more general subj
Might want to check your local.cf file for:
It is located in/etc/mail/spamassassin
# Enable the Bayes system
use_bayes 1
Robert
Peace he would say instead of goodbyepeace my brother.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
Just add 10 to a test that matches everything, then subtract 10 for
being in the U.S.
Ken A.
Pacific.Net
Robert Swan wrote:
Let's say I wanted to score everything but the US. Do I have to write
rule for every country or is there an easier way?
Robert
header RCVD_IN_NERDSeval:check_rbl(
Hello,
I installed exim4 and spamassassin following
http://koivi.com/exim4-config/
Installing and configuring Exim 4 on Debian
Bayes did not work and I read the wiki entry:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BayesNotWorking
Bayes doesn't seem to be working for me!
To create the bayes databa
Postfix/Amavis-new
Spamassassin 3.1.4
I ran Amavis debug-sa and I'm curious if the is normal?
[5846] dbg: dns: success for 9 of 26 queries
[5846] dbg: dns: timeout for habeas-firsttrusted after 13 seconds
[5846] dbg: dns: timeout for njabl after 13 seconds
[5846] dbg: dns: timeout fo
Let's say I wanted to score everything but the US. Do I have to write
rule for every country or is there an easier way?
Robert
header RCVD_IN_NERDSeval:check_rbl('nerds','zz.countries.nerd.dk.')
describe RCVD_IN_NERDS Received from a spam country
tflags RCVD_IN_NERDSnet
header RCVD_IN
Jason Little wrote:
> Just fire it through your ISP's mail server. They should be able to relay
> for you without a problem.
>
> Jason
Why would things look any different if I use my ISP instead of my IMP
(Mail Provider)? I'll check this week, but I'm not conviced yet.
And how about those idea
Spam Assassin wrote:
Why was this topic not started on the SPF list? Was the original poster of
this topic looking to get MORE attention on the SpamAssassin list?
Whether you and the other amateur-topic-police* like it or not, the
subject is related to the more general subject matter of the l
I'm using the latest SpamAssassin, 3.1.7, with perl 5.8.8 with Slack
11.0, MySQL 5.0.24a, DBD-mysql-3.0008, DBI-1.53.
I should also mention I am using MIMEDefang to call the
Mail::SpamAssassin routines versus running spamc and spamd, but my
question (I believe) is independent of that usage.
I te
Why was this topic not started on the SPF list? Was the original poster of
this topic looking to get MORE attention on the SpamAssassin list?
Gino Cerullo wrote:
On 13-Dec-06, at 12:53 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
Yep - they are using "normal" email technology. That's supposed to
work. That's what SPF breaks. It also breaks email forwarding.
I prefer to say "email forwarding breaks SPF" but that's just semantics.
The truth of the matte
--On Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:01 AM -0800 Ken A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Some people on this list have to pay per kb of bandwidth used.
You might want to read the list with a newsreader, through gmane. Then you
just download the headers and pick and choose the bodies you want.
My pra
Justin Mason wrote:
SPF is *NOT*
for catching spam. It works great at what we use it for in SpamAssassin
-- as an authentication mechanism,
Just to pick nits:
SPF is not an authentication mechanism, it's an authorization mechanism.
It is VERY important to not confuse the two. (and, while
On 13-Dec-06, at 1:15 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sounds good,
I found this an interesting read about why SPF is ineffective:
http://en.hakin9.org/products/articleInfo/102
Excellent article.
SPF catches no spam - but does create false positives. It's less
than useles
Just fire it through your ISP's mail server. They should be able to relay
for you without a problem.
Jason
-Original Message-
From: Chris Purves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 2:37 PM
To: Martin von Gagern
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Sim
Martin von Gagern wrote:
Now I realized that mail I send will be marked by such a setup as spam.
There are mostly two rules that hit: HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR and
RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL. The latter one only happens some times, I guess it's
a timeout issue, because it can happen or not for the very same ma
Steve Lake wrote:
Those razor2 and pyzor checks look interesting, but I haven't
seen them on any of my emails that get filtered. Is that something
special you have to setup, or is it a default feature of SA?
The spamassassin wiki, as well as manual pages are full of information
abo
On 13-Dec-06, at 12:53 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
Mark, SPF isn't an anti-spam technology. Anyone who says it is, is an
imbecile. SPF is an anti-forgery technology. Those who continue to
think
of SPF purely as a spam control technology are doomed to be
disappointed
and/or endlessly make posts l
Marc Perkel wrote:
SPF blocks no spam but
it does create false positives on legitimate email.
Well, so does any other method of trying to decide if a message is legit
or not. If I work for $company, and $company publishes a restrictive
SPF record, then (presuming the sysadmin is competent) a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ignore that msg... wasn't meant to go here, sorry :)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFgE9rJQIKXnJyDxURAhmgAJwIbRTfUXxcd2xACQXeSDXqcHsZwQCgoXIJ
pqAyV
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
can you provide me the message which triggered the 2 warnings + the
error? Also, are your files unchanged or did you add any
scanset/preprocessor?
Chris
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with
Hey folks,
ApacheCon EU will be in May, and they're currently running a Call For Papers.
I'm planning to put in at least two proposals (more below), but I'm curious as
to what kinds of presentations people would be interested in ...? What kind
of information would make you want to goto a conferen
Well, I have a simple plan. Spammers are inherently greedy,
right? Why not offer a $25k-$25mil a head bounty on any spammer captured
and brought to justice? Even if we can't convict them on crimes of
spamming, we can certainly get them on fraud and other things. There's
plenty of la
What many of you fail to realize is that although SPF was originally
envisioned as an anti-spam tool, because it dealt with a major
characteristic of spam, address forgery, it is in fact a domain
verification tool.
With that in mind, it becomes irrelevant whether spammers publish SPF
poli
Marc Perkel writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Sounds good,
> > I found this an interesting read about why SPF is ineffective:
> > http://en.hakin9.org/products/articleInfo/102
>
> Excellent article.
>
> SPF catches no spam - but does create false positives. It's less than
> useless. It's d
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sounds good,
I found this an interesting read about why SPF is ineffective:
http://en.hakin9.org/products/articleInfo/102
Excellent article.
SPF catches no spam - but does create false positives. It's less than
useless. It's dangerous.
Sounds good,
I found this an interesting read about why SPF is ineffective:
http://en.hakin9.org/products/articleInfo/102
Quoting Kelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Resending this since I originally sent it from a misconfigured client
(forgot to enable SMTP-AUTH, but POP-before-SMTP let it through)
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
