Re: Custom Bayes score

On Sep 17, 2009, at 13:35, Dan Schaefer wrote: In a general consensus for those who have customized your BAYES scores, what are they? I run from 4,5 (thought it was 5.0) to -3 What I'm NOT looking for is a lecture on how everybody's systems are different. But that is essentially true.

Re: Can I auto-delete emails scoring 10 and above, yet mark as spam those 5 and above?

drkwc writes: > New Spamassassin nb qs: > > On the configuration panel, I have SpamAssassin set to mark as spam any > email scoring 5 or above. > > I have a rule set in Outlook Express to route those to a SpamAssassin SPAM > folder. > > Now, I'm wondering, can I ALSO set the auto-delete function

Re: Move SPAM into SPAM folder

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote: I need to know how can I automatically move all emails that are considered as SPAM to a specific directory called SPAM. The server has installed Dovecot + Qmail + Vpopmail + Simscan + Spamassassin 3.2.5 + ClamAV. At present all emails are co

Re: Move SPAM into SPAM folder

On Thu, 2009-09-17 at 17:07 -0500, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote: > I need to know how can I automatically move all emails that are > considered as SPAM to a specific directory called SPAM. This is not a SA question. SA scores mail. It does not deliver, move or reject mail, nor anything else but sco

[no subject]

Dear Sirs, I need to know how can I automatically move all emails that are considered as SPAM to a specific directory called SPAM. The server has installed Dovecot + Qmail + Vpopmail + Simscan + Spamassassin 3.2.5 + ClamAV. Simscan is configured with: ./configure --enable-clamav=y --enable-c

Move SPAM into SPAM folder

Dear Sirs, I need to know how can I automatically move all emails that are considered as SPAM to a specific directory called SPAM. The server has installed Dovecot + Qmail + Vpopmail + Simscan + Spamassassin 3.2.5 + ClamAV. Simscan is configured with: ./configure --enable-clamav=y --enable-c

Re: NOTICE: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 mass-checks now starting

On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 11:39 AM, John Hardin wrote: > On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, LuKreme wrote: > >> On Sep 16, 2009, at 22:13, Austin wrote: >> >>> It had one header: Subject.  Then a body.  Should >>> I leave stuff like this in?  I mean, it is ham, but... >> >> My feeling would be if it is local onl

Re: Custom Bayes score

> In a general consensus for those who have customized your > BAYES scores, what are they? I have been experimenting > with them, but I have not been successful with a > "perfect" score. What I'm NOT looking for is a lecture on > how everybody's systems are different. > I have set BAYES_99 to 5,

Re: Skip DNSBL checks for a specific IP/Net

On 17.09.09 23:07, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > Microsoft Office Outlook 11. Wow, I didn't know it sucks *that* badly. > No proper threading headers (In-Reply-To and References), I think that newest outlook does that, luckily. However it still can't thread on those and uses its stupid Thread-Inde

Re: Skip DNSBL checks for a specific IP/Net

On Thu, 2009-09-17 at 23:07 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > Can you help me writing these ? > > Well, here are two UNTESTED and ad-hoc written rules, to be used in a > meta as I previously outlined. The first IP variant in this case matches > an entire /24 network, the RDNS variant matches a

Re: Custom Bayes score

On 17.09.09 15:35, Dan Schaefer wrote: > In a general consensus for those who have customized your BAYES scores, > what are they? I have been experimenting with them, but I have not been > successful with a "perfect" score. What I'm NOT looking for is a lecture > on how everybody's systems ar

Re: strange entries in log

> >> Per Jessen wrote: > >>> A domain name component cannot be more than 63 characters. > > On Sep 17, 2009, at 11:25, Jason Bertoch wrote: > >> I am under the impression that host names are limited to 255 characters. > >>  Maybe I missed something in the RFC? > 2009/9/17 LuKreme : > > No, 255 T

Re: Skip DNSBL checks for a specific IP/Net

Microsoft Office Outlook 11. Wow, I didn't know it sucks *that* badly. No proper threading headers (In-Reply-To and References), produces fugly Kammquoting, and even injects an empty line after each and every line of text. And *then* converts that monstrosity into HTML, preserving the utterly brok

Re: strange entries in log

Thanks for the information. If I understand correctly, an email is scan by spamassassin and in this email, a link or a headers point to a an "invalid" domain. Thanks, François 2009/9/17 LuKreme : > On Sep 17, 2009, at 11:25, Jason Bertoch wrote: > >> Per Jessen wrote: >>> >>> A domain name comp

Re: Skip DNSBL checks for a specific IP/Net

> De : Karsten Bräckelmann [ mailto:guent...@rudersport.de] > > On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 15:38 -0400, Philippe Ratté wrote: > > > If it is anything else, we might be much better able to help you, > > > if we know about the issue -- rather than what you think would

Custom Bayes score

In a general consensus for those who have customized your BAYES scores, what are they? I have been experimenting with them, but I have not been successful with a "perfect" score. What I'm NOT looking for is a lecture on how everybody's systems are different. Thanks, Dan Schaefer Web Developer/

Re: NOTICE: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 mass-checks now starting

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, LuKreme wrote: On Sep 16, 2009, at 22:13, Austin wrote: It had one header: Subject. Then a body. Should I leave stuff like this in? I mean, it is ham, but... My feeling would be if it is local only then don't include it. Agreed. -- John Hardin KA7OHZ

Re: strange entries in log

On Sep 17, 2009, at 11:25, Jason Bertoch wrote: Per Jessen wrote: A domain name component cannot be more than 63 characters. I am under the impression that host names are limited to 255 characters. Maybe I missed something in the RFC? No, 255 TOTAL characters, but no one component can exc

Re: strange entries in log

Jason Bertoch wrote: Per Jessen wrote: A domain name component cannot be more than 63 characters. I am under the impression that host names are limited to 255 characters. Maybe I missed something in the RFC? Hmm, I suppose I did get it wrong...I misunderstood the definition of label.

Re: NOTICE: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 mass-checks now starting

On Sep 16, 2009, at 22:13, Austin wrote: It had one header: Subject. Then a body. Should I leave stuff like this in? I mean, it is ham, but... My feeling would be if it is local only then don't include it. -- Sent from my iPhone

Re: strange entries in log

Per Jessen wrote: A domain name component cannot be more than 63 characters. I am under the impression that host names are limited to 255 characters. Maybe I missed something in the RFC?

Re: strange entries in log

François Rousseau wrote: > Hello, > > I just notice that I have many time the same strange line in my spamd > log. Anyone have an idea about this? > > SpamAssassin Server version 3.2.5 > > log entries: > Sep 16 18:08:06 myhostname spamd[2008]: > s-female-silhouettes-beverages-film-hearts-music

Re: NOTICE: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 mass-checks now starting

On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 04:01, Warren Togami wrote: > On 09/16/2009 11:25 PM, Justin Mason wrote: >> >> excellent.  That's 2 people who could do with an extension, then! > > Could we state with clarity the new deadline?  I might have other people > with data depending on the extended deadline. Le

strange entries in log

Hello, I just notice that I have many time the same strange line in my spamd log. Anyone have an idea about this? SpamAssassin Server version 3.2.5 log entries: Sep 16 18:08:06 myhostname spamd[2008]: s-female-silhouettes-beverages-film-hearts-music-notes-and-thea... Sep 16 18:08:06 myhostname

Re: Experimental Plugin: MetaSVM

So - what ever happened to this project? Was it finished? decoder wrote: LuKreme wrote: I don't see any need for the model to be dynamic. Periodic recalculation of it should be just fine. I bet even daily reprocessing will prove to be over zealous. Weekly, perhaps even monthly. This is wha

Re: NOTICE: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 mass-checks now starting

On 09/17/2009 08:34 AM, Mark Martinec wrote: Austin, now hope to do this Thursday/Friday. I should be able to scan my million or so messages in a day on my cluster. Wow, that makes me feel inadequate :) I'm struggling to clean up my little ham sample of 3600 messages, and looking at another

Re: NOTICE: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 mass-checks now starting

On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 02:34:24PM +0200, Mark Martinec wrote: > Austin, > > > > now hope to do this Thursday/Friday. I should be able to scan my > > > million or so messages in a day on my cluster. > > > > Wow, that makes me feel inadequate :) I'm struggling to clean up my > > little ham sampl

Re: NOTICE: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 mass-checks now starting

Austin, > > now hope to do this Thursday/Friday. I should be able to scan my > > million or so messages in a day on my cluster. > > Wow, that makes me feel inadequate :) I'm struggling to clean up my > little ham sample of 3600 messages, and looking at another couple > thousand that I'll do if

Re: NOTICE: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 mass-checks now starting

On 09/16/2009 11:25 PM, Justin Mason wrote: excellent. That's 2 people who could do with an extension, then! Could we state with clarity the new deadline? I might have other people with data depending on the extended deadline.

Re: NOTICE: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 mass-checks now starting

On Wednesday September 16 2009 22:03:17 Justin Mason wrote: > Who is running a mass-check that's still in progress? (fwiw, I am ;) > It'll be at least 5 users (with myself and John), but that's not a > great population of training data. I spent a couple of afternoons cleaning up my corpus or 60.0