Howdy all,
Have I gone insane or has Pyzor stopped working?
My last successful hit was yesterday ~7am GMT-7.
mail:~# cat /etc/spamassassin/.pyzor/servers
82.94.255.100:24441
---
mail:~# pyzor --homedir=/etc/spamassassin/ ping
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/pyzo
Okay, got some samples online to look at:
http://66.213.231.82/spam/sample1.txt
http://66.213.231.82/spam/sample2.txt
http://66.213.231.82/spam/sample3.txt
http://66.213.231.82/spam/sample4.txt
http://66.213.231.82/spam/sample5.txt
http://66.213.231.82/spam/sample6.txt
http://66.213.231.82/spam/sa
On Thursday 31 July 2008 11:58 pm, Jake Maul wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I've recently been getting more simple drug-related spam that has no
> real obfuscation and often doesn't get flagged with anything other
> than HTML_MESSAGE (0.0) and BAYES_XX (generally 50-99).
>
> A few sample Subject lines:
>
As you can see from the response I just posted, I'm not using MySQL for
bayes (albeit, maybe I should be, that seems very convenient.)
>You do not need to include the X-Spam-* header fields as they are
>stripped before learning.
Thanks. I'll pull those out.
-Original Message-
From: Duan
Great guess! I was running as root before (sudo.) Here are the results when I
run the command as the site-wide user.
sa-learn --dump magic
0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db version
0.000 0329 0 non-token data: nspam
0.000 0
On Fri, 1 Aug 2008, Brett Millett wrote:
I've been googling quite a bit today to find the answer to what I'm
seeing that is happening on my mail server. However, I just can't seem
to find a definitive answer. When looking at my mail logs I see a number
of autolearn=spam, however when I run "sa-l
On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 15:28 -0600, Brett Millett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been googling quite a bit today to find the answer to what I'm
> seeing that is happening on my mail server. However, I just can't seem
> to find a definitive answer. When looking at my mail logs I see a number
> of autolearn=s
Hi,
I've been googling quite a bit today to find the answer to what I'm
seeing that is happening on my mail server. However, I just can't seem
to find a definitive answer. When looking at my mail logs I see a number
of autolearn=spam, however when I run "sa-learn --dump magic" nspam does
not incre
On Fri, 1 Aug 2008, Rejaine Monteiro wrote:
note: i'm not talking about block *attached* files .. (my qmail-scanner
already do this..)
Oops. I misread your question then.
i need a rule to targed as spam e-mail with *links to* dangerous files..
Here's what I use:
uri EXECUTABLE
OK..
Sorry for my bad english ... Thank you for the tip..!
Karsten Bräckelmann escreveu:
On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 15:01 -0300, Rejaine Monteiro wrote:
note: i'm not talking about block *attached* files .. (my
qmail-scanner already do this..)
i need a rule to targed as spam e-mail with
On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 15:01 -0300, Rejaine Monteiro wrote:
> note: i'm not talking about block *attached* files .. (my
> qmail-scanner already do this..)
> i need a rule to targed as spam e-mail with *links to* dangerous files..
Yes, I did understand that, and that's exactly what I discusse
note: i'm not talking about block *attached* files .. (my
qmail-scanner already do this..)
i need a rule to targed as spam e-mail with *links to* dangerous files..
Karsten Bräckelmann escreveu:
On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 14:40 -0300, Rejaine Monteiro wrote:
Hi all
How can I create a gen
On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 14:40 -0300, Rejaine Monteiro wrote:
> Hi all
>
> How can I create a generic rule to block any e-mail with links to
> dangerous files ?
Easy, just ask those folks related to tools in your mail processing
chain that actually can block mail. SA does not. SA tags mail, it does
> -Original Message-
> From: Michelle Konzack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 1:29 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Solution for Disaster spam?
>
> Am 2008-08-01 07:07:59, schrieb Micha? J?czalik:
> > On Sun, 27 Jul 2008, Robert Nicholson wrot
Hi all
How can I create a generic rule to block any e-mail with links to
dangerous files ?
Like http://.zip or http://***.exe or ***.doc.exe etc...
I have only seen this happen on Cron messages generated by our apt-cacher.
I am running a Debian Lenny machine with:
SpamAssassin version 3.2.5
running on Perl version 5.10.0
I am calling spamassassin through amavid-new 2.6.0
I have pastebinned my debug output, I'm not sure what else whould be
Am 2008-08-01 07:07:59, schrieb Micha? J?czalik:
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008, Robert Nicholson wrote:
>
> >What have people been using to curtail some of the new disaster spam
> >that's quite common now?
>
> Well, indeed it was clamav that helped me. After upgrading to most recent
> version, 95% of t
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 6:07 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 21:58 -0700, Jake Maul wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I've recently been getting more simple drug-related spam that has no
>> real obfuscation and often doesn't get flagged with anything other
>> than
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Richard Frovarp
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jake Maul wrote:
>>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I've recently been getting more simple drug-related spam that has no
>> real obfuscation and often doesn't get flagged with anything other
>> than HTML_MESSAGE (0.0) and BAYES_XX (ge
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 12:53 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 31.07.08 21:58, Jake Maul wrote:
>> I've recently been getting more simple drug-related spam that has no
>> real obfuscation and often doesn't get flagged with anything other
>> than HTML_MESSAGE (0.0) and BAYES
Jake Maul wrote:
Greetings,
I've recently been getting more simple drug-related spam that has no
real obfuscation and often doesn't get flagged with anything other
than HTML_MESSAGE (0.0) and BAYES_XX (generally 50-99).
A few sample Subject lines:
Subject: Use Generik Viagra and forget about y
On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 21:58 -0700, Jake Maul wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I've recently been getting more simple drug-related spam that has no
> real obfuscation and often doesn't get flagged with anything other
> than HTML_MESSAGE (0.0) and BAYES_XX (generally 50-99).
>
> A few sample Subject lines:
On 31.07.08 21:58, Jake Maul wrote:
> I've recently been getting more simple drug-related spam that has no
> real obfuscation and often doesn't get flagged with anything other
> than HTML_MESSAGE (0.0) and BAYES_XX (generally 50-99).
[...]
> Subject: Use Generik Viagra and forget about your sexual
23 matches
Mail list logo
