Re: Question concerning HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32

> A 3-5% ratio of our email is getting tagged with HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32 which > according to the DOC is HTML: images with 2800-3200 bytes of words. The Yes, it's the message size that's in question, not the "" tag. it's expected that the rule may fire on ham -- that's why it only scores 1.6 po

Re: box trapper filter and wildcard question

dan li wrote: > Hello. I am wondering if the Box Trapper is a part of spam assasain? Never heard of it until now, but it's essentially the same thing as TMDA, which is a particularly abhorrent idea. Any kind of challenge-response "spam control" system is simply foisting your spam problems into th

Re: blacklisting

D Ivago wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to blacklist some domians who sent me spam, I added > following lines in local.cf like I do to whitelist a > domain. > > whitelist_from_rcvd *@ vsko.be vsko.be > whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Spamassassin memory problem

just an idea, did you use awl ? if so, try it and disable it ... that was probleme here some time before ... \jd signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: procmailrc question

Systemwide I use this so everything get scanned: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> cat /etc/procmailrc VERBOSE=on ORGMAIL=Mailbox MAILDIR=$HOME #LOGFILE=procmail-log DROPPRIVS=yes :0fw * < 128000 | spamc :f:lock-file * | /usr/bin/formail -a "Status: O" INCLUDERC=.procmailrc :0:lockfile * ^TO* Mailbox Each

Spamassassin memory problem

Hi group, After a couple of days experimenting and searching the internet + reading the FAQ I decided to try my luck here :) Since last week one of my mailservers is running out of memory on a regular basis because of the memory usage of spamd. At those times one spamd process is using ~ 75%

Re: box trapper filter and wildcard question

dan li wrote: Hello. I am wondering if the Box Trapper is a part of spam assasain? If so, I am hoping some of you can give me the correct lines for the addresses I want to whitelist by using wildcard expressions. Boxtrapper appears to be part of (or an add on to) cpanel. It is not related

box trapper filter and wildcard question

Hello. I am wondering if the Box Trapper is a part of spam assasain? If so, I am hoping some of you can give me the correct lines for the addresses I want to whitelist by using wildcard expressions. 1) all email ending in .edu to be whitelisted 2) all email ending in .bellsouth.net So are t

Re: Problem with mass-check on cygwin

Fred T wrote: > Hello users, > > I'm getting ready for the mass-check run for rescoring 3.2 and I'm > seeing an awful lot of messages like: > > bayes: cannot open bayes databases > /cygdrive/E/Temp/spamassassin-trunk/masses/spam > assassin/bayes_* R/W: lock failed: File exists > > Being on

Problem with mass-check on cygwin

Hello users, I'm getting ready for the mass-check run for rescoring 3.2 and I'm seeing an awful lot of messages like: bayes: cannot open bayes databases /cygdrive/E/Temp/spamassassin-trunk/masses/spam assassin/bayes_* R/W: lock failed: File exists Being on cygwin, what are my options to dea

Re: NOTICE: 3.2.0 mass-checks heads-up

Fred T writes: > Hello Justin, > > Thursday, January 18, 2007, 9:22:14 AM, you wrote: > > > Hi all -- > > > we're going to be starting the mass-checks for 3.2.0 RSN. These will be > > used to generate an up-to-date score set for that release. > > > Should we run sa-update before we begin th

Re: NOTICE: 3.2.0 mass-checks heads-up

Hello Justin, Thursday, January 18, 2007, 9:22:14 AM, you wrote: > Hi all -- > we're going to be starting the mass-checks for 3.2.0 RSN. These will be > used to generate an up-to-date score set for that release. Should we run sa-update before we begin the mass-check? I'm just curious if or

Re: [SPAM:***] blacklisting

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007, D Ivago wrote: Hi, I'm trying to blacklist some domians who sent me spam, I added following lines in local.cf like I do to whitelist a domain. whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] vsko.be whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] vlhorb.be whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED

NOTICE: 3.2.0 mass-checks heads-up

Hi all -- we're going to be starting the mass-checks for 3.2.0 RSN. These will be used to generate an up-to-date score set for that release. If you have a hand-classified, clean set of mail corpora [1] [2], and are able and willing to run mass-check over them [3] and submit the results via rsyn

blacklisting

Hi, I'm trying to blacklist some domians who sent me spam, I added following lines in local.cf like I do to whitelist a domain. whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] vsko.be whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] vlhorb.be whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] omcdgent.be blacklist_from_rcvd [EMA

Re: ClamAV plugin with 3.1.17

Michel Vaillancourt writes: > Brent Kennedy wrote: > > Woops I meant .cf file not pm file. > > > > I just wanted to make sure this is still accurate: > > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ClamAVPlugin > > As a suggestion, the way I am doing it is running ClamAV as my > SMTP proxy... so it gets

Re: ClamAV plugin with 3.1.17

Brent Kennedy wrote: > Woops I meant .cf file not pm file. > > I just wanted to make sure this is still accurate: > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ClamAVPlugin > As a suggestion, the way I am doing it is running ClamAV as my SMTP proxy... so it gets virus scanned and dropped as req

RE: Lint failed - Rules Du Jour

A couple of weeks ago I didn't have the problem. > > ***WARNING***: spamassassin --lint failed. > Rolling configuration files back, not restarting SpamAssassin. > Rollback command is: mv -f /etc/spamassassin/blacklist.cf > /etc/spamassassin/RulesDuJour/sa-blacklist.current.2; mv -

Lint failed - Rules Du Jour

files back, not restarting SpamAssassin. Rollback command is: mv -f /etc/spamassassin/blacklist.cf /etc/spamassassin/RulesDuJour/sa-blacklist.current.2; mv -f /etc/spamassassin/RulesDuJour/blacklist.cf.20070118-0443 /etc/spamassassin/blacklist.cf; mv -f /etc/spamassassin/blacklist-ur

Re: PLease help

Yes, the answer definitely lies in upgrading. Dirk > Hi, > > I am newbie to this list and quite new to the difficulties in fight spam. > Please accept my apologies if sending a copy spam message to the list is > not acceptable etiquette > > We have started to receive quite a lot of spam in this t

Re: getting Bayes token data from spamassassin

Jonas Eckerman wrote: > I do not consider my plugin "nice" since it uses DBI in such an unoptimized > way. I did optimize it slightly yesterday, so maybe I do consider it almost nice now. :-) > It really should use a prepared statement Now it does this. It probably should use the DELAYED key

RE: Increase in unmarked spam

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi > > Test SARE rules (sare_stock, sare_spoof especially) and fred's rules > from www.rulesemporium.com are very useful.. > > Also make sure you're running SA 3.1.7 with the latest "sa-update"-ed > core rules.. [...] > > Recently (for the last two w

RE: Increase in unmarked spam

Hi Test SARE rules (sare_stock, sare_spoof especially) and fred's rules from www.rulesemporium.com are very useful.. Also make sure you're running SA 3.1.7 with the latest "sa-update"-ed core rules.. -- Martin Hepworth Snr Systems Administrator Solid State Logic Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300 > -O

Increase in unmarked spam

Recently (for the last two weeks), we are seeing lot of unmarked spam. Lot of them with image and text. Are there any rules in spamassassin that would tackle this? I am using botnet - but still unable to stop these kind of spam effectively. Regards, Sujit

Re: Question concerning HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32

Office of the Postmaster writes: > I sent the below about 10 days ago and I didnt see anything from anyone. > > A 3-5% ratio of our email is getting tagged with HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32 which > according to the DOC is HTML: images with 2800-3200 bytes of words. The > only problem is the emails in qu

Question concerning HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32

I sent the below about 10 days ago and I didnt see anything from anyone. A 3-5% ratio of our email is getting tagged with HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32 which according to the DOC is HTML: images with 2800-3200 bytes of words. The only problem is the emails in question had only 1 image in them and it was