Howdy folks,
Just a friendly reminder that the *.sare.sa-update.dostech.net channels
that I provide [1], for free, are intended for use with SpamAssassin's
sa-update and not any half baked home brew solutions.
sa-update uses a light-weight method (that utilizes DNS) to determine
when updates
Daniel Aquino wrote:
> Does anyone know actually know where the:
> "Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::RelayCountry"
> module is actually ran ?
>
> I dont see anything in /usr/share/spamassassin/* that is doing it...
There are no default rules that make use of it.
By default, only the bayes subsystem use
Henry Kwan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am running 3.18 on a vanilla CentOS 4 box and tried to upgrade to 3.20. The
> make/make test/make install cycle went fine but I noticed that the scoring is
> slightly different between the two version. I sent myself an email and here's
> how they scored:
>
> 3.18:
>
>
AbbaComm.Net abbacomm.net> writes:
> I noticed a large difference in scoring "behavior" between the versions
> 3.1.8 and 3.2.0 myself.
>
> Yet, after training bayes and then after a few more days of bayes auto
> learn, things seem to have "mostly" cleared up.
Ok, I'll check again after a few da
> Did the Bayes scoring change that much between 3.18 and 3.20?
> Also, it
> looks like 3.20 SPF checking is broken. How can I debug where it broke?
Henry
I noticed a large difference in scoring "behavior" between the versions
3.1.8 and 3.2.0 myself.
Yet, after training bayes and then after a
That would appear to be an unrelated problem, since none of those rules use
high-bit characters.
Since there doesn't appear to be anything wrong with the rules themselves, I
would think it is a problem with either SA or the way it is being called.
That said, we can check again on the hit rate
> > Does this fix the performance problems I was having, or
> does it just fix
> > the UTF errors showing in the logs with Perl < 5.8.8 ?
>
> You might try it and see if it helps with the performance.
> Since it does
> fix the UTF-8 issue it won't be doing as much logging and
> grinding. let us kno
Hi,
Am running 3.18 on a vanilla CentOS 4 box and tried to upgrade to 3.20. The
make/make test/make install cycle went fine but I noticed that the scoring is
slightly different between the two version. I sent myself an email and here's
how they scored:
3.18:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.4 re
> If you word the note appropriately there would be no need to change it
> again. Something along the lines of "Also note that, like all such
> settings, the default values can be overridden by configuration files
> including those downloaded using sa-update. For example, the official
> sa-update c
Quoting Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 05:50:41PM +0200, John Wilcock wrote:
I don't see what harm could be done by adding a note in the
documentation to point out that this default can be (and has been)
updated using sa-update.
So, hypothetically, next week when
Does anyone know actually know where the:
"Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::RelayCountry"
module is actually ran ?
I dont see anything in /usr/share/spamassassin/* that is doing it...
Dave Pooser wrote:
This looks familiar... as in I think I've fixed this before familiar.
What version of SA are you using?
SA 3.1.5, Perl 5.8.6, on Mac OS X
Some more reading found that [SPF failed: ] is a normal result for an SPF
timeout, so I set spf_timeout 30 and will see if that helps any
Henrik Krohns wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:41:44PM +0300, Henrik Krohns wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 09:52:39PM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
OK - I did this with Exim rules but the same trick could be used in SA.
I figured out a trick that catches 419 spam with amazing accuracy.
> You realize that spamd isn't a milter, right?
After running into the same problem with clamav and doing more research,
I'm realizing that that's my problem here...
Thanks for the patient reply.
-Doug
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 11:32:02AM -0500, Doug Phillips wrote:
> At the current time, both spamassassin and sendmail are running as root.
>
> The milter configuration in sendmail is as follows:
> INPUT_MAIL_FILTER(`smf-spamd', `S=unix:/var/spool/smf/smf-spamd.sock,
> T=S:1m;R:1m')
You realize th
Hi all. I'm working with an issue that has been really driving me
crazy. I've searched the archives and not found anything that is really
pertaining to my problem, so I'd like to run this by the list and see
what I'm missing.
First off, configuration:
Sendmail 8.13.1/8.14.1 (RHEL4 stock package
SpamAssassin version 3.2.0
I ran sa-update so I will see how that manages.
Thanks
On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 09:03 -0700, Evan Platt wrote:
> At 09:00 AM 5/23/2007, Poohba wrote:
> >All of a sudden I am getting so much spam and its not being caught. Is
> >there an update or something?
>
> Perhaps
Thanks,
I did not know about that option. I will give that a try.
Shane
-Original Message-
From: Matthias Haegele [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:03 AM
To: SpamAssassin
Subject: Re: spamass dcc Problem
Henrik Krohns schrieb:
> On Wed, May 23, 2007
At 09:00 AM 5/23/2007, Poohba wrote:
All of a sudden I am getting so much spam and its not being caught. Is
there an update or something?
Perhaps. What version are you on?
Run sa-update.
All of a sudden I am getting so much spam and its not being caught. Is
there an update or something?
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 05:50:41PM +0200, John Wilcock wrote:
> I don't see what harm could be done by adding a note in the
> documentation to point out that this default can be (and has been)
> updated using sa-update.
So, hypothetically, next week when the update removes this change, should we
Jim Maul wrote:
It is somewhat confusing as if you were to read the documentation, it
says the default is 0.1. However, if you were to download SA and
install it without any modifications, the value that would be used for
this threshold would be -1. Being that devs can release conf changes
w
On Wed, 23 May 2007, Jim Maul wrote:
Duane Hill wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2007, Abba Communications wrote:
Since the introduction of SA v3.2.0, bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam
appears to be -1.0.
from Duane
Duane and others
With all sincere and due respect to the DEV's and their excell
Duane Hill wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2007, Abba Communications wrote:
Since the introduction of SA v3.2.0, bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam
appears to be -1.0.
from Duane
Duane and others
With all sincere and due respect to the DEV's and their excellent hard
work...
I understand it take
On Wed, 23 May 2007, Abba Communications wrote:
Since the introduction of SA v3.2.0, bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam
appears to be -1.0.
from Duane
Duane and others
With all sincere and due respect to the DEV's and their excellent hard
work...
I understand it takes a lot of work to
Henrik Krohns schrieb:
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 09:02:34AM -0400, Thomas Mullins wrote:
One more thing,
I had to allow the DCC port out. Then I had to allow ICMP traffic
out/in. DCC uses ping to determine the closest servers. I am not sure
if this is the same problem you are having, but I had
>
> Since the introduction of SA v3.2.0, bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam
> appears to be -1.0.
> from Duane
Duane and others
With all sincere and due respect to the DEV's and their excellent hard
work...
Just how many places should this setting be???
I can understand it being in some ty
Since the introduction of SA v3.2.0, bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam
appears to be -1.0.
I realize in the code, 0.1 is the default set:
push (@cmds, {
setting => 'bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam',
default => 0.1,
type => $Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf::CONF_TYPE_NUMERIC
});
One more thing,
I had to allow the DCC port out. Then I had to allow ICMP traffic
out/in. DCC uses ping to determine the closest servers. I am not sure
if this is the same problem you are having, but I had a similar problem
and this was the solution.
HTH,
Shane
-Original Message-
Fr
Robert Schetterer wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jari Fredriksson schrieb:
>> Robert Schetterer wrote:
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> Hi @ll,
>>> i.e i have mails forwarded allready spamfiltered and marked
>>> with something like ***isp
> This looks familiar... as in I think I've fixed this before familiar.
> What version of SA are you using?
SA 3.1.5, Perl 5.8.6, on Mac OS X
Some more reading found that [SPF failed: ] is a normal result for an SPF
timeout, so I set spf_timeout 30 and will see if that helps any.
--
Dave Pooser
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jari Fredriksson schrieb:
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hi @ll,
>> i.e i have mails forwarded allready spamfiltered and marked
>> with something like ***isp-spam-marked*** in the subject
>> and in
Robert Schetterer wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi @ll,
> i.e i have mails forwarded allready spamfiltered and marked
> with something like ***isp-spam-marked*** in the subject
> and in mail header somthing like X-ISP-Antispam: 3.
> Is there a chance to use this info
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi @ll,
i.e i have mails forwarded allready spamfiltered and marked
with something like ***isp-spam-marked*** in the subject
and in mail header somthing like X-ISP-Antispam: 3.
Is there a chance to use this info to feed the local spamassasin
to learn/h
34 matches
Mail list logo
