Sorry, what report? Is there a report tool I can use?
Karsten Bräckelmann-2 wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 06:52 -0700, John Hardin wrote:
>> On Sun, 3 May 2009, Jodizzz wrote:
>
>> > SA:SPAM-DELETE:RC:0(xxx.xx.xxx.xxx):SA:1(1528.3/5.5)
>
> OK, so there's the SA score as reported by qmail.
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 19:55 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 6-May-2009, at 19:46, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > Awesome. So I mentioned it twice in this thread, once each before your
> > follow-ups, and you keep on ignoring and arguing. Which part of of auto-
> > learning and before local delivery is u
On 6-May-2009, at 19:46, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Awesome. So I mentioned it twice in this thread, once each before your
follow-ups, and you keep on ignoring and arguing. Which part of of
auto-
learning and before local delivery is unclear to you?
This has nothing to do with either autole
Awesome. So I mentioned it twice in this thread, once each before your
follow-ups, and you keep on ignoring and arguing. Which part of of auto-
learning and before local delivery is unclear to you?
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 17:34 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 6-May-2009, at 06:50, Karsten Bräckelmann wr
On 6-May-2009, at 06:50, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 01:43 -0600, ɹןʇnqן wrote:
The trouble appears to me to be that sa-learn has no concept of
whether or not it has learned a message or not. Since all IMAP
messages are stored with unique names, is there some easy way to
cr
On Wed, 6 May 2009, Simone Morandini wrote:
When I set back "Use SpamAssassin = yes" and restart MS, messages start to
pile up again.
What do you suggest me to try?
SA should be logging something to maillog for every message scanned (I'm
not sure if MailScanner fiddles with that aspect of SA
Hi all,
I'm using SA + MS on a RHEL box with sendmail.
I'm having a strange problem in the last couple of days: my
/var/spool/mqueue.in directory increases in the number of messages, that are
thus delivered with a significant delay (the mqueue directory is almost
empty). No configuration changes
Ok, this horse is not only dead, but it's been totally pulverized. Can
we now please kill this ridiculously drawn-out thread - or maybe it can
be taken off-line by those that wish to continue this diatribe?
Thanks!
Bill
Kris Deugau wrote:
> Bazooka Joe wrote:
>> centos w/ sendmail - 500+ users - some users want their spam or a
>> higher spam level - most are happy w/ defaults. Would like to not scan
>> outgoing email.
>>
>> 1. spamass-milter
>> 2. procmail
>> 3. other?
>
> For per-user configs, it's easiest to cal
On 6-May-2009, at 08:50, Charles Gregory wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2009, Mark wrote:
Only several posts ago you had never even heard of SMTP AUTH
I mentioned it in my original post. But let's just ignore this small
factual error and continue
No you didn't. The string 'auth' does not ap
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 15:23 -0500, LuKreme wrote:
> > It does, they are stored in the bayes_seen file if you are using
> > db storage.
>
> It odes int aht it doesn't relearn then, but it doesn't in terms of
> processing them. Lemme explain.
I already explained in this very thread why there is
On 6-May-2009, at 07:13, RW wrote:
On Wed, 6 May 2009 01:43:08 -0600
ɹןʇnqן wrote:
The trouble appears to me to be that sa-learn has no concept of
whether or not it has learned a message or not.
It does, they are stored in the bayes_seen file if you are using
db storage.
It odes int aht it
> > URIBL_RHS_DOB
> > DNS_FROM_DOB
> > RCVD_IN_DOB
Guys, update to the latest release 3.2.5, or run sa-update. DNS_FROM_DOB
and RCVD_IN_DOB have been removed from the rule-set. [1]
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 15:33 -0400, Adam Katz wrote:
> Interesting ... I am suddenly lacking anything but the sc
Ah ha, you can use something like
header FROM_SAME_AS_TO ALL=~/\nFrom: ([^\n]+)\n.*To: \1/sm
> add spf to your domain
But see e.g., http://david.woodhou.se/why-not-spf.html
Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
Hi!
I wanted to ask if others were seeing timeouts with the DOB lookups
within spamassassin. Also, it looks like their website
http://www.support-intelligence.com/dob/ is timing out as well.
Are others seeing this as well? I'm assuming most are zero'ing out the
rul
On Wed, 6 May 2009, Adam Katz wrote:
SpamAssassin does not need to run on your outbound server.
It could be argued that doing so is useful to detect intrusions that
result in a spambot being installed on the local network.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jha
Kris Deugau wrote:
> Bazooka Joe wrote:
>> centos w/ sendmail - 500+ users - some users want their spam or a
>> higher spam level - most are happy w/ defaults. Would like to not scan
>> outgoing email.
>>
>> 1. spamass-milter
>> 2. procmail
>> 3. other?
>
> For per-user configs, it's easiest to ca
Paul Houselander wrote:
> Have been noticing its taking longer to process my messages today - have
> been scratching my head trying to resolve!
>
> Is it just a case of zeroing out scores for
>
> URIBL_RHS_DOB
> DNS_FROM_DOB
> RCVD_IN_DOB
>
> They were the DOB rules I could find via the spamas
Bazooka Joe wrote:
centos w/ sendmail - 500+ users - some users want their spam or a
higher spam level - most are happy w/ defaults. Would like to not scan
outgoing email.
1. spamass-milter
2. procmail
3. other?
For per-user configs, it's easiest to call spamc from procmail; prefs
can be sto
> I wanted to ask if others were seeing timeouts with the DOB lookups within
> spamassassin. Also, it looks like their website
> http://www.support-intelligence.com/dob/ is timing out as well.
>
> Are others seeing this as well? I'm assuming most are zero'ing out the
rule
> for the time being?
centos w/ sendmail - 500+ users - some users want their spam or a
higher spam level - most are happy w/ defaults. Would like to not scan
outgoing email.
1. spamass-milter
2. procmail
3. other?
Hi!
I wanted to ask if others were seeing timeouts with the DOB lookups within
spamassassin. Also, it looks like their website
http://www.support-intelligence.com/dob/ is timing out as well.
Are others seeing this as well? I'm assuming most are zero'ing out the rule
for the time being?
We
I wanted to ask if others were seeing timeouts with the DOB lookups
within spamassassin. Also, it looks like their website
http://www.support-intelligence.com/dob/ is timing out as well.
Are others seeing this as well? I'm assuming most are zero'ing out the
rule for the time being?
Clay
problem solved
@bypass_header_checks_maps = ([ qw(.domain.com .domain1.com .domain2.com)
]);
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/whitelist-problem-%3A%28-tp23401263p23411850.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I don't normally cross post, but this is kind of MAJOR news. For those who
don't know, SPAM-L has been what I consider an anchor in the anti-spam
community since long before I got interested in a clean Inbox. This is a
very dark day indeed. :-(
Monday, 11 May 2009 it goes silent.
--Chris Sante
On Wed, 6 May 2009, Mike Cardwell wrote:
"I have an idea which involves deleting every third character of your email
to make it route over the Internet faster. What do you think?"
People wouldn't respond with, "That's a bad idea because x", they'd respond
with "Don't be stupid", and "That's a cr
On Wed, 6 May 2009, ermille1979 wrote:
configuration file "/usr/share/spamassassin/20_advance_fee.cf" requires
version 3.002004 of SpamAssassin, but this is code version 3.02.
I would suggest you first try to fix this problem before looking at
anything else. It seems an SA upgrade was not
Charles Gregory wrote:
Okay, enough with the righteous indignation already.
You know, if people put as much effort into my idea as they have into
'putting me in my place', there could be some really great discussions.
Sigh...
Granted. And upon being informed of this new development, I indi
On Tue, 5 May 2009, Mark wrote:
Okay, enough with the righteous indignation already.
You know, if people put as much effort into my idea as they have into
'putting me in my place', there could be some really great discussions.
Sigh...
Only several posts ago you had never even heard of SMTP
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 01:43 -0600, ɹןʇnqן wrote:
> The trouble appears to me to be that sa-learn has no concept of
> whether or not it has learned a message or not. Since all IMAP
> messages are stored with unique names, is there some easy way to
> create a cache of the messages it has check
Hi,
processes. It has even, on occasion, necessitated a reboot when i could not
get the system to kill the process. I've taken to trying to scan it daily and
manually delete the spam, but that's not always possible.
This hint might be totally wrong, but last time I saw such a behavior it
was
On Wed, 6 May 2009 01:43:08 -0600
ɹןʇnqן wrote:
> The trouble appears to me to be that sa-learn has no concept of
> whether or not it has learned a message or not.
It does, they are stored in the bayes_seen file if you are using
db storage.
Ehm...yes ;-)
this is my file init.pre
# will affect how those files are parsed, like which plugins are loaded
# etc.
#
###
# RelayCountry - add metadata for Bayes learning, marking the countries
# a message was relayed th
ermille1979 wrote:
> Hi Matt!
>
> OH! Sorry..
>
> This is file correct
>
> This is My file local.rc
>
Hopefully you mean local.cf not local.rc :)
Also, can you check your init.pre and make sure it contains this line:
loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF
I think that may have to do with
vibi wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I have a problem with the wrong classification of the white list
>
> Entry local.cf
> --
> # white list
> include script/whitelist.cf
> --
>
> Entry whitelist.cf
>
> --
> whitelist_from *...@domain.com
> whitelist_from *...@domain1.com
> whitelist_f
vibi wrote:
> Hello,
> I have a problem with the wrong classification of the white list
>
> Entry local.cf
> --
> # white list
> include script/whitelist.cf
> --
>
> Entry whitelist.cf
>
> --
> whitelist_from *...@domain.com
> whitelist_from *...@domain1.com
> whitelist_from *...
On Tue, 5 May 2009, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2009, Sean Leinart wrote:
We have several email distribution lists a...@mydomain.com
Is there a way, or a rule to allow this address to be valid internally
but be rejected if the source originates from outside of our network.
It's a long
I have one user on my system who receives a LOT of spam. This is
intentional as that user is set to never discard email once it is
received. I scan the spam and let it auto-expire out of the IMAP
folder after 7 days. The trouble is, in those 7 days, the folder
usually grows to between 150
Hi Matt!
OH! Sorry..
This is file correct
This is My file local.rc
###
#
# rewrite_header Subject *SPAM*
# report_safe 1
# trusted_networks 212.17.35.
# lock_method flock
report_safe 1
#required_hits 4
required_sco
Hello,
I have a problem with the wrong classification of the white list
Entry local.cf
--
# white list
include script/whitelist.cf
--
Entry whitelist.cf
--
whitelist_from *...@domain.com
whitelist_from *...@domain1.com
whitelist_from *...@domain2.com
--
Although this
40 matches
Mail list logo
