I have one email address which doesn't need spam assassin because it has a
unique way of rejecting all email except ones with a certain format in the
subject area. I am noticing when this mailbox is read thazt there are often
a huge number of emails which are obviously spam. this is using resource
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 00:17, Faisal N Jawdat wrote:
> On Apr 16, 2007, at 9:34 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
> > Try to learn it, if it comes back with something to the affect of:
> > "learned from 0 messages, processed 1.." then it's already been
> > learned.
>
> this seems to be the common suggestio
On Apr 16, 2007, at 9:34 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
Try to learn it, if it comes back with something to the affect of:
"learned from 0 messages, processed 1.." then it's already been
learned.
this seems to be the common suggestion.
it has a couple drawbacks, as i see it:
1. it's relatively cp
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
I just got a report of ham blocked with the following rules. This is a
repeated ham report for TVD_FW_GRAPHIC_ID1 and thinking of setting its
score to zero. Is there any recommendations on how to handle any of
these rules?
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=8.692 tag=-999 tag2=5
Faisal N Jawdat wrote:
> Is there an easy way to tell if sa-learn has learned a given message
> before?
Try to learn it, if it comes back with something to the affect of:
"learned from 0 messages, processed 1.." then it's already been learned.
All you can do is wiatelist them, or reduce scores for everyone for
those rules.
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
Join SECNAP at SecureWorld Atlanta, May 1-2
http://www.secnap.com/events for free and discounted seminar tickets
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Fitzpatrick [mailto:[EMAIL PRO
On Mon, 2007-04-16 at 19:43 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> If its just one sender, just whitelist them.
>
> Those rules below do indicate that that email may be coming from a
> 'permission[sic] based email marketing' company.
>
Sorry, hit send to quickly on that last message...
elasmtp-junco
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, Kelson wrote:
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Sat, April 14, 2007 10:31, Wael Shahin wrote:
whitelist_from 172.16.0.0/16
trusted_networks 172.16.0.0/16
whitelist_from is for email not for ip :-)
That won't do what you think. trusted_networks is for IPs that you trust to
p
On Mon, 2007-04-16 at 19:43 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> If its just one sender, just whitelist them.
>
> Those rules below do indicate that that email may be coming from a
> 'permission[sic] based email marketing' company.
>
elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net
--
Robert
If its just one sender, just whitelist them.
Those rules below do indicate that that email may be coming from a
'permission[sic] based email marketing' company.
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
Join SECNAP at SecureWorld Atlanta, May 1-2
http://www.secnap.com/events for free and discounted seminar ti
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 08:30:01PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> I'm not completely sure why the perl module doesn't trigger that rule, byt
> please try a test spam *with* a header.
>
> | describe MISSING_HB_SEP Missing blank line between message header and body
I'm actually using this to cat
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Sat, April 14, 2007 10:31, Wael Shahin wrote:
whitelist_from 172.16.0.0/16
trusted_networks 172.16.0.0/16
whitelist_from is for email not for ip :-)
That won't do what you think. trusted_networks is for IPs that you
trust to provide honest header information, not
> > These seem to be conflicts between the POSIX and Fcntl modules from
> > Perl; not something inherently in FuzzyOcr. FuzzyOcr's author(s)
> > should really look at whether importing these from two places is really
> > necessary, however.
>
> Is there anything i can do to fix this?
It is a cos
I just got a report of ham blocked with the following rules. This is a
repeated ham report for TVD_FW_GRAPHIC_ID1 and thinking of setting its
score to zero. Is there any recommendations on how to handle any of
these rules?
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=8.692 tag=-999 tag2=5 kill=5
tests=[DNS_F
Spamassassin List wrote:
I am getting some errors when try to spamassassin -t < email.txt
Subroutine FuzzyOcr::O_CREAT redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/POSIX.pm line 19
Subroutine FuzzyOcr::O_EXCL redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5
Spamassassin List wrote:
> I am getting some errors when try to spamassassin -t < email.txt
>
> Subroutine FuzzyOcr::O_CREAT redefined at
> /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
> at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/POSIX.pm line 19
> Subroutine FuzzyOcr::O_EXCL redefined at
> /usr
Have you installed the programs that FuzzyOcr is calling?
rpm -qa ocrad?
Yes i have.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spam]# rpm -qa ocrad
ocrad-0.16
Hi,
I am getting some errors when try to spamassassin -t < email.txt
Subroutine FuzzyOcr::O_CREAT redefined at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm
line 65.
at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/POSIX.pm line 19
Subroutine FuzzyOcr::O_EXCL redefined at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm
l
The confusion is about the -u option. Normally spamd runs as root and
spawns a new daemon with uid of the user receiving the e-mail. That
would be recommended indeed. If your users are not local to the machine,
because it is being used as a relay for example the -u option is used to
spawn a new pro
On Monday 16 April 2007 09:27, Phil Dibowitz wrote:
> I'm trying to use Mail::SpamAssassin::Client in my code, but I get very
> different results using it than I do when I use spamc.
> [...]
> Here's the test spam:
>
>
> Well done!
> http://amcvuhwk.com/qeix/uop
On Monday 16 April 2007 19:59, Spamassassin List wrote:
> Hi,
>
> spamassassin -D --lint shows that i am having some problem with domainkey
>
> [31077] warn: plugin: failed to parse plugin (from @INC): Can't locate
> Mail/DKIM.pm in @INC [...]
> [...] at
> /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Mail/Spam
> [31077] warn: plugin: failed to parse plugin (from @INC):
> Can't locate Mail/DKIM.pm
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# rpm -q perl-Mail-DomainKeys
> perl-Mail-DomainKeys-1.0
>
> What other package do i need?
Like the message says, you need Mail::DKIM if you have
SA::Plugin::DKIM enabled.
(Mail::DomainK
Hi,
spamassassin -D --lint shows that i am having some problem with domainkey
[31077] warn: plugin: failed to parse plugin (from @INC): Can't locate
Mail/DKIM.pm in @INC (@INC contains: lib
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8
/usr/lib/per
Is there an easy way to tell if sa-learn has learned a given message
before?
-faisal
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 11:18:20AM -0400, Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
> I know it not recommended to run spamd as root-, however during the install
Really? Where do you get that impression? Running it as root is the
default and how most people use it. However, running as few processes as
root i
> Its not really a gui per-say , its sort-of like when you run
sysinstall
> and
> you get the blue screen with the options and you put an X next to what
> you
> want to select- that's what came up-
He's talking about installing from FreeBSD ports. Some packages throw
up a ncurses type screen allo
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 11:18:20AM -0400, Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
> I know it not recommended to run spamd as root-, however during the install
Really? Where do you get that impression? Running it as root is the
default and how most people use it. However, running as few processes as
root is
-
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I know it not recommended to run spamd as root-, however during the install
> when I got the blue gui screen - it said "run spamd as root"- recommended"
>
> I meant to hit cancel , instead I hit ok-
>
> Question is why does it say recommended ,
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, Matt Kettler wrote:
> > 0.000 0569 0 non-token data: nspam
> You have trained 569 nonspam messages
that should be: 569 spams (Number SPAM)
> > 0.000 0 7 0 non-token data: nham
> You have trained 7 spam messages
and: 7 h
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 11:18:20AM -0400, Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
> I know it not recommended to run spamd as root-, however during the install
Really? Where do you get that impression? Running it as root is the
default and how most people use it. However, running as few processes as
root is go
Hi,
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
Hi everyone,
I know it not recommended to run spamd as root-, however during the install
when I got the blue gui screen - it said "run spamd as root"- recommended"
I meant to hit cancel , instead I hit ok-
Question is why does it say recommended , also how do I und
Jim Moyes wrote:
> Sorry = I should have said NO access to *.cf files
>
> I use a simple blacklist/whitelist in a user_prefs file as I have access to
> any *.cf
> files.
>
> Is there a rule/line I can add which will mark as spam any message which has
> been
> sent to a user which contains a numbe
Hi everyone,
I know it not recommended to run spamd as root-, however during the install
when I got the blue gui screen - it said "run spamd as root"- recommended"
I meant to hit cancel , instead I hit ok-
Question is why does it say recommended , also how do I undo that ?
Jean-Paul
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:51:59 -0400 (EDT), Frank Bures wrote:
>For no apparent reason I started to see the following error messages (huge
>amounts of them) when I run 'sa-learn' or 'spamassassin --lint'
>
>Use of uninitialized value in numeric lt (<)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
For no apparent reason I started to see the following error messages (huge
amounts of them) when I run 'sa-learn' or 'spamassassin --lint'
Use of uninitialized value in numeric lt (<) at
/etc/mail/spamassassin/FuzzyOcr/Config.pm line 691.
Use of uni
Sorry = I should have said NO access to *.cf files
I use a simple blacklist/whitelist in a user_prefs file as I have access to any
*.cf
files.
Is there a rule/line I can add which will mark as spam any message which has
been
sent to a user which contains a number
ie = blacklist_to *0 - [EMAIL
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, Jim Moyes wrote:
I use a simple blacklist/whitelist in a user_prefs file as I have access to any
*.cf
files.
Is there a rule/line I can add which will mark as spam any message which has
been
sent to a user which contains a number
ie = blacklist_to *0 - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I use a simple blacklist/whitelist in a user_prefs file as I have access to any
*.cf
files.
Is there a rule/line I can add which will mark as spam any message which has
been
sent to a user which contains a number
ie = blacklist_to *0 - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We have only 6/7 mail addresses which a
NFN Smith wrote:
Jake Vickers wrote:
[ "${TMPDIR}" ] || TMPDIR="${SA_DIR}/RulesDuJour"; # Where we store
old rulesets. If you delete
I'm not talking about editing the script. I am talking about the
config file. Do you have /etc/mail/rulesdujour/config ?
Yes, I know that.
When I origi
I'm trying to use Mail::SpamAssassin::Client in my code, but I get very
different results using it than I do when I use spamc.
With spamc I get 5.7 points, but with Mail::SpamAssassin::Client I get 3.2
points.
Here's a very simple example to illustrate this:
Here's the test spam:
--
PakOgah wrote:
>
> Matt Kettler wrote:
>> Mário Gamito wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> How can i know how many messages did already sa-learn processed ?
>>>
>> You mean the total number of messages learned in the bayes database
>> (includes sa-learn and autolearn)?
>>
>> sa-learn --dump magic
> an
41 matches
Mail list logo
