On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 02:22:58PM -0500, Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
> What is the significance of this message in the spamd log?
>
> Feb 27 12:56:25 localhost spamd[222]: config: dup unknown type freemail_re,
> Regexp
If it works, nothing I guess. I don't use spamd, so can't test. Perhaps
$self
Note I said "raw"; by that I meant "before any filtering". Also, I was
speaking about manual training, though I could see where autolearn might lead
to the above ratio.
Has anyone seen good results from autolearn? I never did so disabled it
long ago. Have seen many (other's) Bayes DBs become
Uhm, wait -- let me re-phrase my hasty suggestion to report to dnswl.org
for removal.
> -1.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low
> trust
> [70.103.162.29 listed in list.dnswl.org]
IP address 70.103.162.29 is listed at dnswl.org with
Subscribing to a mailing-list decreases response time drastically. No
moderation. But I guess you should know that... ;)
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 11:56 +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> since 2009-02-25 I become bombed by arround 430.000 spams like the one
> below and I had to decrease my spamscore
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 11:56 +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Hello,
>
> since 2009-02-25 I become bombed by arround 430.000 spams like the one
> below and I had to decrease my spamscore, since I was not able to
> disable this crappy test of RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW which persists.
>
Have you tr
Michelle Konzack wrote:
Hello,
since 2009-02-25 I become bombed by arround 430.000 spams like the one
below and I had to decrease my spamscore, since I was not able to
disable this crappy test of RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW which persists.
Contacting dnswl.org can help all of us. They can down
Hello,
since 2009-02-25 I become bombed by arround 430.000 spams like the one
below and I had to decrease my spamscore, since I was not able to
disable this crappy test of RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW which persists.
Can someone tell me where I find it and how to disable?
[ 'STDIN' ]--
What is the significance of this message in the spamd log?
Feb 27 12:56:25 localhost spamd[222]: config: dup unknown type freemail_re,
Regexp
(Somebody asked a similar question in November, but I didn't see an answer.)
Thanks,
Larry
John Hardin wrote:
>Note I said "raw"; by that I meant "before any filtering".
Ah.
> Also, I was speaking about manual training, though I could see where
>autolearn might lead to the above ratio.
I would say that about 99% of our training comes from autolearn. I only
feed (with sa-learn) what
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Savoy, Jim wrote:
0.000 0 206774 0 non-token data: nspam
0.000 01515235 0 non-token data: nham
John Hardin wrote:
I got the impression that the goal was to have a ratio that roughly
reflected the spam:ham ratio of your raw
>> 0.000 0 206774 0 non-token data: nspam
>> 0.000 01515235 0 non-token data: nham
> John Hardin wrote:
>I got the impression that the goal was to have a ratio that roughly
reflected the spam:ham ratio of your raw mail stream. If Jim gets 17
times
m
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 04:27 -0800, Simone Morandini wrote:
> I'm running SpamAssassin and I moderate some Majordomo mailing-lists on a
> RHEL box.
> After a message on the list is approved, it passes a double check, since the
> header says something like:
>
> X-MailScanner-SpamCheck not spam, Spam
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 17:14 -0700, Savoy, Jim wrote:
> 0.000 0 206774 0 non-token data: nspam
> 0.000 01515235 0 non-token data: nham
If Jim gets 17 times more ham than spam, the above would be reasonable
>> Did you see Justin's reply? SA *exclusively* uses the *first* nameserver
>> in resolv.conf. So maybe the DNS server at 80.58.0.33 is dead, and this
>> is the only machine that happens to have that one first...
>
> Sorry, this thread is getting big and I am trying to reply to all of you :-)
>
> Y
> -Original Message-
> From: Elsa Andrés [mailto:e.and...@ist-sci.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 9:36 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: dnsbl checks time out
>
> Anyway, when I perform a test via "spamassasssin -D..." I'm running it
> as
> root.
All of your te
Jan P. Kessler wrote:
>
> Just a guess: Is /etc/resolv.conf readable by the uid you run sa/amavis?
>
***
ls -l /etc/resolv.conf
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 118 Feb 26 19:09 /etc/resolv.conf
***
I think yes.
Anyway, when I perform a test via "spamassasssin -D..." I'm running it as
root.
--
Vie
Elsa Andrés schrieb:
> OTOH, that server cannot be dead as I can perform any "host" or "dig"
> queries with it:
>
Just a guess: Is /etc/resolv.conf readable by the uid you run sa/amavis?
Hi all,
I'm running SpamAssassin and I moderate some Majordomo mailing-lists on a
RHEL box.
After a message on the list is approved, it passes a double check, since the
header says something like:
X-MailScanner-SpamCheck not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=0.173,
required 4, HTML_80_90 0.1
18 matches
Mail list logo
