hello list,
i am facing spamd child processing timeout errors in my maillog and
after that it does not scan mails and SPAMs are passed through. i am
having qmail installation, spamassassin 3.1.8 on perl 5.8.7, with
bayes, awl and userpref on postgresql on a remote machine.
here is my local.cf
r
I'm seeing the below logs in my mail.log for every piece of e-mail.
Not sure what I did that started this, FuzzyOcr WAS working fine..
Mar 1 23:33:27 espphotography spamd[335]: (Can't locate object
method "dummy_check" via package "Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus"
at
/opt/local/lib/perl5/s
While writing rules
How can I find how many headers with the same keyword exist ?
How can I recognize to which one a matching rule apply ?
Or is it necessary to write a plugin in order to have access to this
information ?
Thanks a lot !
--
You will find the CA certificate and the CRL her
yes the learning folders are stored on the server. The same server is
running IMAP, MTA, and SA. The site does not have a high load of email, so
processor load shouldn't be a big issue, not to say that I don't care about
efficiency.
John D. Hardin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, ram01 wrot
We have do it for some of our clients with SBS 2003 and exchange 2003
std, it's working fine.
You will need gnuPG for running sa-update if I remeber correctly.
François Rousseau
2007/3/1, Bret Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Any issues installing SA on a Microsoft Small Business Server
> with the
Hi,
Is anyone else seeing these. They seem to have 2 word subjects
starting with "at", "for" or "good". I don't seem to get any personally,
but one of my users seems to get 500 or 600 a week
Thanks, Tuc
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, ram01 wrote:
> OK so if I have a global database but separate IMAP spame boxes
> how should i go about actually running sa-learn. from the cron
> point of view I would have to enum all the users and do
> /home/user/isSpam, /home/userb/isSpam, etc. I could also run it
> in pro
Really... I cannot understand, why I put this loadmodule to local.cf :) Now it
is working, thank you
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 01:07:36PM +0200, Alexey wrote:
>> Hello, i have emerged all needed Perl modules for SPF checking, added
>> "loadmodule ..." to local.cf file, but
> Don't do that. plugi
Personally $me is using simple bash-script, like
...
#!/bin/bash
echo "Learning SPAM..."
sa-learn --progress --spam /opt/system/mail/spamfilter/spam/
rm -fr /opt/system/mail/spamfilter/spam/*
echo "Learning HAM..."
sa-learn --progress --ham /opt/system/mail/spamfilter/ham/
rm -fr /opt/system/mail/s
OK so if I have a global database but separate IMAP spame boxes how should i
go about actually running sa-learn. from the cron point of view I would
have to enum all the users and do /home/user/isSpam, /home/userb/isSpam,
etc.I could also run it in procmail, this would run more often but on
s
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 01:07:36PM +0200, Alexey wrote:
> Hello, i have emerged all needed Perl modules for SPF checking, added
> "loadmodule ..." to local.cf file, but
Don't do that. plugins go in pre files, not cf files. Just uncomment it
appropriately.
--
Randomly Selected Tagline:
Chutzpa
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Alexis Manning wrote:
> > I'm using FuzzyOCR 3.4.2 - does 3.5.1 have any additional support for
> > animated GIFs?
>
> Yes, it uses gifsicle.
Ah... thanks! Ran into problems last time I tried upgrading, but maybe
it's worth another go.
Alexis Manning wrote:
[snip]
> I'm using FuzzyOCR 3.4.2 - does 3.5.1 have any additional support for
> animated GIFs?
Yes, it uses gifsicle.
--
René Berber
I prefer single(global) DB because all users get the same spam, and I learn
from any spam and "secure" with this
others - IMO it is a good idea.
> What is the best way to run sa-learn with separate IMAP training folders per
> user, but global bayes database.
> --
> View this message in context:
>
>>
>> > BAD Idea.
>> >
>> > I just looked at about 3 dozen pieces of e-mail. Only about 4 of them had
>> > my real name. So would you also add extra points for that?
>>
>> Personally I'd say "bad idea" rather than "BAD idea".
>>
>> I in fact have such a rule that scores at around 2 points, and
Rick Macdougall-2 wrote:
>
> pvpsc wrote:
>> Dont know if this is a SpamAssassin question or not.
>>
>> We're running SA 3.1.3 on a slackware 10 / ker 2.4.26 box with qmail
>>
>> SA works great. We've had it running for a while now. But there are
>> still
>> the occasional false positives
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, deepak wrote:
> i've [EMAIL PROTECTED] in whitelist.
Exactly what command did you use to put it there?
Can you post the headers from a message that was improperly scored?
--
John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]FALaholi
Thanks a lot for your response
I'm using SA 3.1 .7
i've [EMAIL PROTECTED] in whitelist.I really couldn't notice anything strange
on the server when this problem is reported.
Evan Platt wrote:
At 11:11 AM 3/1/2007, deepak wrote:
Hello,
I'm having a very strange problem with whilte listing
What is the best way to run sa-learn with separate IMAP training folders per
user, but global bayes database.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/best-method-for-sa-learn-tf3329149.html#a9256805
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
At 11:11 AM 3/1/2007, deepak wrote:
Hello,
I'm having a very strange problem with whilte listing in Spamassassin.
I've one domain in whiltelist (along with other domains) of
spamassassin. it looks that whitelist feature works some time while
some times it doesnt.
please suggest something.
Re
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 12:41:14AM +0530, deepak wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm having a very strange problem with whilte listing in Spamassassin.
> I've one domain in whiltelist (along with other domains) of
> spamassassin. it looks that whitelist feature works some time while some
> times it doesnt.
Hello,
I'm having a very strange problem with whilte listing in Spamassassin.
I've one domain in whiltelist (along with other domains) of
spamassassin. it looks that whitelist feature works some time while some
times it doesnt.
please suggest something.
Regards
..
pvpsc wrote:
Dont know if this is a SpamAssassin question or not.
We're running SA 3.1.3 on a slackware 10 / ker 2.4.26 box with qmail
SA works great. We've had it running for a while now. But there are still
the occasional false positives/negatives from time to time. So we still
have the
At 09:21 AM 3/1/2007, pvpsc wrote:
Dont know if this is a SpamAssassin question or not.
We're running SA 3.1.3 on a slackware 10 / ker 2.4.26 box with qmail
SA works great. We've had it running for a while now. But there are still
the occasional false positives/negatives from time to time.
Hello,
Quick question... This is a snippet from the exim mailing list:
> The routers and transports seem fine. However, a quick check
> through a FreeBSD Spamassassin change log does reveal that a
> bug was introduced that gave problems with Exim, Spamassassin
> and BSMTP:
>
> http://pkgsrc.se/m
Dont know if this is a SpamAssassin question or not.
We're running SA 3.1.3 on a slackware 10 / ker 2.4.26 box with qmail
SA works great. We've had it running for a while now. But there are still
the occasional false positives/negatives from time to time. So we still
have the marked SPAM em
On Thursday 01 March 2007, Raymond Schwartz wrote:
>I have been using Kintera to send emails with a template for the last
> few months. The template remains the same and only the text content
> changes.
>
>Our spam scores have been around 1.3.
>
>Last month, I started seeing this in our score repor
I have been using Kintera to send emails with a template for the last few
months.
The template remains the same and only the text content changes.
Our spam scores have been around 1.3.
Last month, I started seeing this in our score report:
0.7 MIME_HTML_ONLY BODY: Message only has text
John D. Hardin wrote:
That looks kinda fragile in the face of multiple TO addresses.
Agreed, though that's not a scenario that I personally see very often.
In any case it was only meant as a simplified example from which the
original poster could build his own rule.
John.
--
-- Over 3000 w
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, John Wilcock wrote:
> header__TO_userTo =~ /[EMAIL PROTECTED]/i
> header__GOODREAL_user To =~ /\b(?:first|sur|nick)name\b/i
>
> meta BADREAL_user (__TO_user && !__GOODREAL_user && !TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL
> && !NO_REAL_NAME && !USER_IN_WHITELIST)
> des
Evan Platt wrote:
At 07:10 AM 3/1/2007, Steven W. Orr wrote:
Sometimes messages get through but something I see that we could maybe
do something about is the full name.
If the message is sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and joedoe's fullname is
Joe Doe, then I'd like to get SA to see that
To: Heav
BAD Idea.
I just looked at about 3 dozen pieces of e-mail. Only about 4 of them had
my real name. So would you also add extra points for that?
Personally I'd say "bad idea" rather than "BAD idea".
I in fact have such a rule that scores at around 2 points, and only about
10-15% of the time do
At 07:10 AM 3/1/2007, Steven W. Orr wrote:
Sometimes messages get through but something I see that we could
maybe do something about is the full name.
If the message is sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and joedoe's fullname
is Joe Doe, then I'd like to get SA to see that
To: Heavenly Mergatroyd <[E
Sometimes messages get through but something I see that we could maybe do
something about is the full name.
If the message is sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and joedoe's fullname is Joe
Doe, then I'd like to get SA to see that
To: Heavenly Mergatroyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
should score a couple extr
> Any issues installing SA on a Microsoft Small Business Server
> with their Exchange version?
I can't think of any.
> Any recommendations pros/cons will be appreciated.
Get the latest ActivePerl (5.8.8.820) and perl modules.
See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/InstallingOnWindows
See http:
We have a server that is filtering inbound messages destined for our
internal email server. Other than SMTP verification to the internal
server, the filter server has no knowledge of account existance.
This filter server is running Postfix and I am able to send to spamc the
user name. However,
Mark Adams wrote:
> Hi There,
>
> SA 3.1.7-1.
>
> I have setup openprotect http://saupdates.openprotect.com/
>
> Ever since I set it up my whitelists have not worked, these are
> located in /etc/spamassassin
>
> I thought that spamassassin checked both of these directories for
> rules, Am I cor
Hello,
Quick question... This is a snippet from the exim mailing list:
> The routers and transports seem fine. However, a quick check
> through a FreeBSD Spamassassin change log does reveal that a
> bug was introduced that gave problems with Exim, Spamassassin
> and BSMTP:
>
> http://pkgsrc.se/ma
> You said in your other email that "since the --local option disables
> net tests, SA may pass a lot more spam". Does this mean it will think
> a lot of legit email is spam, whereas before it knew it was legit?
Nope, he means the opposite - that a lot more spam will get through as
clean, as the
Hello, i have emerged all needed Perl modules for SPF checking, added
"loadmodule ..." to local.cf file, but
"spamassassin -D < /opt/message" show
[19283] dbg: generic: SpamAssassin version 3.1.8
(...)
[19283] dbg: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF from @INC
[19283] dbg: plugin: regi
Hello,
Replies inline...
Gary V wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> > If some work and some don't I suspect this could possibly
>> > be a timeout issue.
>>
>> It is a timeout... see my message at 09:30 GMT this morning...
>>
>>
>> 421 SMTP incoming
Hi There,
SA 3.1.7-1.
I have setup openprotect http://saupdates.openprotect.com/
Ever since I set it up my whitelists have not worked, these are located
in /etc/spamassassin
I thought that spamassassin checked both of these directories for rules,
Am I correct?
Thanks,
Mark
On Wednesday 28 February 2007 21:20, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> Test 9 got: "This account is currently not available.: 192.0.2.1 is
> neither permitted nor denied by domain of 06.spf1-test.mailzone.com"
...
> It seems to be getting the strings it wants, there is just the extra
> "This account is
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Some emails have a scantime of more than 900 seconds.
>>
>> I do not see a relation to a huge load on the SpamAssassin Servers
>> (I have 2 of them). The timeout problems happen when there is
>> small load (10 out of 20 spamds marked Busy) as well
44 matches
Mail list logo