Re: How often is the main rules channel updated?

a) It happens manually when someone feels there's a reason to push out a new rule/score. There's not a lot of rule development going on these days, so that's semi-infrequent. b) Not so much. The "announcement" is that sa-update will find a new version via DNS. :) On Tue, Dec 18, 200

Re: "Downloadable Software"

--On Tuesday, December 18, 2007 8:16 PM -0500 Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Do you have network checks enabled? I just grabbed one and it seemed to hit XBL, SpamCop and Razor2 pretty nicely: I'm not using Razor, and I have SpamCop disabled (since October 1). Alas I didn't put a com

How often is the main rules channel updated?

Apologies if you receive this twice. I don't think it made it through the first time ... -- Forwarded message -- Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:20:51 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Grossman To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: How often is the main rules channel updated? I'm worried th

Re: "Downloadable Software"

Kenneth Porter wrote: > I'm seeing a lot of these today, and Bayes seems to be letting a lot > of them leak through. Any good rule for stopping them? The links are > always to a Geocities page. > Do you have network checks enabled? I just grabbed one and it seemed to hit XBL, SpamCop and Razor2 pre

"Downloadable Software"

I'm seeing a lot of these today, and Bayes seems to be letting a lot of them leak through. Any good rule for stopping them? The links are always to a Geocities page.

Re: blackholes.us ?

Per Jessen wrote: > Matt Kettler wrote: > > >>> That's easily checked - we could run a comparison of any up-to-date >>> geoip database against blackholes.us. >>> >>> >> True. >> > > Well, I've answered my own question. I ran a test of maxmind addresses > dated 2007/04/04 against the

Re: blackholes.us ?

Per Jessen wrote: > Matt Kettler wrote: > > >>> That's easily checked - we could run a comparison of any up-to-date >>> geoip database against blackholes.us. >>> >>> >> True. >> > > Well, I've answered my own question. I ran a test of maxmind addresses > dated 2007/04/04 against the

Re: StupidFilter

Sounds like WorkAssassin. "Message looks like a meeting notice, +5". On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 11:16:06AM -0800, Kenneth Porter wrote: > A teammate called my attention to this interesting project: > > > > >The solution we're creating is simpl

Re: blackholes.us ?

Matt Kettler wrote: >> That's easily checked - we could run a comparison of any up-to-date >> geoip database against blackholes.us. >> > True. Well, I've answered my own question. I ran a test of maxmind addresses dated 2007/04/04 against the blackholes.us data dated 2006/05/24. The maxmind dat

Re: blackholes.us ?

Matt Kettler wrote: > Per Jessen wrote: >>> True. Although this is the SpamAssassin mailing list, so, within >>> context of scored systems, the blackholes.us might be of some use. >>> That said, if you're using SA, it's much lighter weight to use the >>> RelayCountries plugin. >> >> That seems har

Re: Developing a Bayes corpus...

Some approaches I've taken: * Set the autolearn thresholds low enough that most messages would be learned. Not as accurate as human learning, but requires little effort. * Set the minimum and maximum messages learned settings down to about 50 from their default 200. Not as accurate, but requi

Re: Rules penalizing The BAT!

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 08:53:13 -0500 "Ken Morley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm using Postfix 2.4.6, Amavisd-new 2.5.2, ClamAV 0.91.2 and > Mail-SpamAssassin 3.2.3 in a Linux mail filter. > > As I recall, SA used to have some rules that penalized e-mail > originating from mass-emailing applic

Re: Rules penalizing The BAT!

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:03:05 -0500 Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The Bat! isn't a mass-emailing application. And frankly, I'm miffed that iowatelecom.net flat out rejects messages with the X-Mailer set to The Bat! -- _|_ (_| |

Re: [guinevere-discuss] Lint errors in 3.4

>>> On 12/18/2007 at 10:02 AM, Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Joe Zitnik wrote: > >>> On 12/18/2007 at 9:00 AM, Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > Clay Davis wrote: > > I've see several people write this. Can someone point me to some debate > > I can review? It seems to me that

Re: [guinevere-discuss] Lint errors in 3.4

Joe Zitnik wrote: > >>> On 12/18/2007 at 9:00 AM, Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > Clay Davis wrote: > > I've see several people write this. Can someone point me to some debate > > I can review? It seems to me that if you set the autolearn threshold > > fairly high and keep any eye on

Re: [guinevere-discuss] Lint errors in 3.4

>>> On 12/18/2007 at 9:00 AM, Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Clay Davis wrote: > I've see several people write this. Can someone point me to some debate > I can review? It seems to me that if you set the autolearn threshold > fairly high and keep any eye on your bayes scoring, it would b

Re: Rules penalizing The BAT!

Ken Morley wrote: > I'm using Postfix 2.4.6, Amavisd-new 2.5.2, ClamAV 0.91.2 and > Mail-SpamAssassin 3.2.3 in a Linux mail filter. > > As I recall, SA used to have some rules that penalized e-mail > originating from mass-emailing applications like "The Bat!". I see > some of these now slipping

Re: [guinevere-discuss] Lint errors in 3.4

Clay Davis wrote: > I've see several people write this. Can someone point me to some debate > I can review? It seems to me that if you set the autolearn threshold > fairly high and keep any eye on your bayes scoring, it would be a good > thing. > IMHO, autolearning is a good thing. However, ex

Re: Custom Plugins

Alex Woick wrote: > Matt Kettler schrieb am 14.12.2007 03:46: >> 1) Plugins are somewhat new to SA (ie: 3.0.0 and higher) >> 2) While not really hard, the work involved in making a sa plugin is >> non-trivial >> 3) You have to know perl. > > The real challenge in writing a plugin is not the coding

Re: blackholes.us ?

Per Jessen wrote: > Matt Kettler wrote: > > >> Per Jessen wrote: >> >>> It doesn't as far as the rejected mail goes - but it does matter wrt >>> the usefulness of blackholes.us. Which is all I'm asking about. >>> >>> >> True. Although this is the SpamAssassin mailing list, so, wi

Re: [guinevere-discuss] Lint errors in 3.4

Clay Davis wrote: I've see several people write this. Can someone point me to some debate I can review? It seems to me that if you set the autolearn threshold fairly high and keep any eye on your bayes scoring, it would be a good thing. Thanks, Clay "Joe Zitnik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/18/200

Rules penalizing The BAT!

I'm using Postfix 2.4.6, Amavisd-new 2.5.2, ClamAV 0.91.2 and Mail-SpamAssassin 3.2.3 in a Linux mail filter. As I recall, SA used to have some rules that penalized e-mail originating from mass-emailing applications like "The Bat!". I see some of these now slipping through and don't see where

Developing a Bayes corpus...

I'm using Postfix 2.4.6, Amavisd-new 2.5.2, ClamAV 0.91.2 and Mail-SpamAssassin 3.2.3 in a Linux mail filter. I'm having problems getting enough ham and spam for Bayes training. I know that public corpuses and starter DB's are available, but would prefer to train using our own ham/spam. Unfortu

Re: [guinevere-discuss] Lint errors in 3.4

I've see several people write this. Can someone point me to some debate I can review? It seems to me that if you set the autolearn threshold fairly high and keep any eye on your bayes scoring, it would be a good thing. Thanks, Clay >>> "Joe Zitnik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/18/2007 6:07 AM >>>

Re: unsubscribe

As the headers of every e-mail say: list-unsubscribe: At 03:10 AM 12/18/2007, Yadwendra Verma wrote: -- Yadwendra N. Verma

unsubscribe

-- Yadwendra N. Verma

Re: Custom Plugins

Matt Kettler schrieb am 14.12.2007 03:46: 1) Plugins are somewhat new to SA (ie: 3.0.0 and higher) 2) While not really hard, the work involved in making a sa plugin is non-trivial 3) You have to know perl. The real challenge in writing a plugin is not the coding itself. It is the algorithm that

Re: blackholes.us ?

Matt Kettler wrote: > [...] > You also get the same effect with European admins blacklisting whole > major US ISP's (ie: verizon.net, comcast.net, etc). Verizon had blocked Europe. The revenge is sweet :-) http://www.google.com/search?q=verizon+blocking+europe http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01

Re: blackholes.us ?

Matt Kettler wrote: > Per Jessen wrote: >> It doesn't as far as the rejected mail goes - but it does matter wrt >> the usefulness of blackholes.us. Which is all I'm asking about. >> > True. Although this is the SpamAssassin mailing list, so, within > context of scored systems, the blackholes.u