> >
>
> as I note in the comments on the blog post -- it seems likely
> that the people having problems are using a bad version of "re2c".
>
> --j.
>
by bad version, do you mean one that doesnt compile or finish compiling
properly, or one that compiles (completes compilation) yet does "bad
Micah Anderson wrote:
> Our poor spamassassin machine is not able to keep up with the mail
> load. We are constantly getting "prefork: server reached --max-children
> setting, consider raising it" errors, and our max-children are already
> set at the max that this machine can handle (50).
>
> Sinc
On Tue, November 18, 2008 22:16, Henrik K wrote:
> The problem is catching smallish local ISP type relays. If such users send
> lots of ham inside Finland and only the occasional spam/virus leak to some
> US honeypot, it's no surprise your list can't be foolproof. I guess I have
> to build my own
James Wilkinson wrote on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:56:34 +:
> > well, but how? By auto-learning? In that case you are just multiplying your
> > problem. It seems a lot of spam gets miscategorized as ham. Auto-learning
> > that spam as ham means enforcing this miscategorization and that's what you
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> well, but how? By auto-learning? In that case you are just multiplying your
> problem. It seems a lot of spam gets miscategorized as ham. Auto-learning
> that spam as ham means enforcing this miscategorization and that's what you
> see as a result.
When SpamAssassin decide
Yes I see a drop in total messages and spam and I see similar
results from http://www.spamcop.net/spamgraph.shtml?spammonth.
Since they knocked off McColo, my unfortunate neighbors in the San
Francisco Bay Area, my mail server has more disk space since I have
been quarantining certain spam mess
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 11:16:27PM +0200, Henrik K wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:34:36PM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
> >
> > If we had a 30% FP rate we would be out of business. I think that's an
> > exaggeration.
>
> What do you call 294 hams out of 836 JMF hits then?
To be fair, I do have
Troy Settle wrote on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:19:56 -0500:
> From incoming mail.
well, but how? By auto-learning? In that case you are just multiplying your
problem. It seems a lot of spam gets miscategorized as ham. Auto-learning
that spam as ham means enforcing this miscategorization and that's wh
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:34:36PM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
> If we had a 30% FP rate we would be out of business. I think that's an
> exaggeration.
What do you call 294 hams out of 836 JMF hits then?
Don't take it personally, even barracuda has similar ratio. I can't add many
points with it
From: Troy Settle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:19:56 -0500
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Troy Settle wrote on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:33:10 -0500:
>
>> I'm having a major problem with the bayes system. I cleared the bayes
>> database and let it start re-learning. On
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 15:19 -0500, Troy Settle wrote:
> Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> > Troy Settle wrote on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:33:10 -0500:
> >
> >> I'm having a major problem with the bayes system. I cleared the bayes
> >> database and let it start re-learning. Once it kicked in, I again
> >> starte
Henrik K wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 03:29:07PM -0500, Micah Anderson wrote:
Over at another post about Phishing[0], Brent suggested setting up
hostkarma.junkemailfilter to my RBL list, which I have done... However
it seems to hit a lot of spams giving them a -5 scoring. I've either got
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Troy Settle wrote on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:33:10 -0500:
I'm having a major problem with the bayes system. I cleared the bayes
database and let it start re-learning. Once it kicked in, I again
started getting false hits with BAYES_00=-2.599 on a great many spam/uce
messages
Micah Anderson wrote:
Our poor spamassassin machine is not able to keep up with the mail
load. We are constantly getting "prefork: server reached --max-children
setting, consider raising it" errors, and our max-children are already
set at the max that this machine can handle (50).
Since we are
Our poor spamassassin machine is not able to keep up with the mail
load. We are constantly getting "prefork: server reached --max-children
setting, consider raising it" errors, and our max-children are already
set at the max that this machine can handle (50).
Since we are using spamc/spamd I fig
mouss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Henrik K wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 08:49:00AM +0100, mouss wrote:
>>> Henrik K wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:25:42PM +0530, ram wrote:
> The number of DNSWL_LOW and DNSWL_MED misfires have gone up especially
> in last two days. Even Marc
ram wrote:
Is this news true ( spams down by 75% )
http://www.securecomputing.net.au/News/128340%2cspam-volumes-drop-75-percent-in-a-day.aspx
On my servers I havent seen any big change
I've seen a drop on a number of servers that I manage.
The best illustration I've found is from Spamcop;
Difference in Spam getting through Spamhaus-Zen and ClamAV signatures
(which include ClamAV, SaneSecurity, MBL, and one other)?
No, delivered spam is about the same # of messages as before.
Difference in number of messages getting bounced by Spamhaus-Zen and
ClamAV? Down about about 40-50%.
Ove
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 15:08 +0530, ram wrote:
> Is this news true ( spams down by 75% )
>
> http://www.securecomputing.net.au/News/128340%
> 2cspam-volumes-drop-75-percent-in-a-day.aspx
>
>
> On my servers I havent seen any big change
If you were inflicted by that particular botnet, you would
On 17.11.08 18:15, Mark Martinec wrote:
> > I have been using USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST to whitelist mails from google
> > alerts
> > It had been working fine , but last 2-3 days I see that these mails dont
> > get an SPF-pass. Seems guys at google are using some other servers
>
> whitelist_from_dkim
Is this news true ( spams down by 75% )
http://www.securecomputing.net.au/News/128340%
2cspam-volumes-drop-75-percent-in-a-day.aspx
On my servers I havent seen any big change
Thanks
Ram
21 matches
Mail list logo
