Re: Does SpamAssassin perform tests/scans on attachments?

On 7/20/2010 10:46 PM, Gnanam wrote: Ted Mittelstaedt-2 wrote: Generally, no. SA skips messages that are larger than a size that you set in the config file. Most attachments are larger than that size. Obviously if you have a really small attachment then it will scan it. Thanks for that

Re: Does SpamAssassin perform tests/scans on attachments?

Gnanam wrote: > > > Ted Mittelstaedt-2 wrote: >> >> Generally, no. SA skips messages that are larger than a size that you >> set in the config file. Most attachments are larger than that size. >> Obviously if you have a really small attachment then it will scan it. > > Thanks for that updat

Re: Does SpamAssassin perform tests/scans on attachments?

Ted Mittelstaedt-2 wrote: > > Generally, no. SA skips messages that are larger than a size that you > set in the config file. Most attachments are larger than that size. > Obviously if you have a really small attachment then it will scan it. Thanks for that update. Assuming my use case need

Re: Does SpamAssassin perform tests/scans on attachments?

Generally, no. SA skips messages that are larger than a size that you set in the config file. Most attachments are larger than that size. Obviously if you have a really small attachment then it will scan it. The principle of spamming basically is dependent on small messages. With small message

Does SpamAssassin perform tests/scans on attachments?

Hi, Does SpamAssassin perform tests/scans on attachments? NOTE: I'm using "spamc (client for spamd)" to get only the spam score of the email message. The email message passed to spamc is assembled/prepared on my own, which is in concert with RFC 822, produced by my web application, which means

Re: [sa] Re: thanks to thinking people.

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010, LuKreme wrote: We are talking about Checking OUTBOUND messages. It is perfectly ok to bounce internal messages. Caveat: As long as proper care is taken to send the bounce to the authenticated sender of the mail and NOT just lamely use the 'From' header! Still prefer an SM

Re: thanks to thinking people.

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: Le mardi 20 juillet 2010 ?? 14:40 -0600, LuKreme a ??crit : On Jul 20, 2010, at 12:16, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: Exactly, meaning that if you run SA on outbound mail then there's no point at all unless you configure it to DELETE the outbound mai

Re: thanks to thinking people.

On Jul 20, 2010, at 18:07, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > Bouncing spam?? What a good way to become a backscatter source (in > addition to spam)! We are talking about Checking OUTBOUND messages. It is perfectly ok to bounce internal messages.

Re: thanks to thinking people.

Le mardi 20 juillet 2010 à 14:40 -0600, LuKreme a écrit : > On Jul 20, 2010, at 12:16, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > > Exactly, meaning that if you run SA on outbound mail then there's no > > point at all unless you configure it to DELETE the outbound mail it > > thinks is spam - and if you do tha

Re: thanks to thinking people.

On Jul 20, 2010, at 12:16, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > Exactly, meaning that if you run SA on outbound mail then there's no > point at all unless you configure it to DELETE the outbound mail it > thinks is spam - and if you do that your going to get shot by your users > over the FPs. Well, no. If

Re: thanks to thinking people.

Sorry it was not directly for you, but more like a general post. Le mardi 20 juillet 2010 à 12:01 -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt a écrit : > You are mistaken. I'm a proponent of port 25 blocks. What I > am saying is that port 25 blocks work far better than attempting to > spamfilter outbound mail. It

Re: thanks to thinking people.

You are mistaken. I'm a proponent of port 25 blocks. What I am saying is that port 25 blocks work far better than attempting to spamfilter outbound mail. It is the other guy who is arguing that spamfiltering outbound mail is better than port 25 blocks. Ted On 7/20/2010 11:46 AM, Alexandre Ch

Re: thanks to thinking people.

You argue about the fficiency of blicking network flow like we do But beyond argue they are simples facts: Before I introduce port 25 blocking I had more than 200 feedback loop complaints daily from differents MSP (Yahoo, AOL, abusix and others). Since blocking is enabled it I have have less tha

Re: thanks to thinking people.

On 7/20/2010 4:55 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:25:26 -0700 Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: It's been our experience that spam-scanning outbound mail causes a lot more problems than setting up mailserver monitoring and being responsive to it. Sooner or later one of your c

Re: thanks to thinking people.

On 7/19/2010 3:55 PM, Brian Godette wrote: On 7/19/2010 2:25 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: On 7/19/2010 12:56 PM, Brian Godette wrote: On 7/19/2010 1:29 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: On 7/19/2010 8:43 AM, Brian Godette wrote: On 7/15/2010 6:55 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: Hi all, Few mo

Re: I need MORE SPAM - You get less spam

On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 09:54:08AM -0500, Daniel McDonald wrote: Looks nice, but the only report types are IPv4 and IPv6. You may wish to describe domain-name (uri), domain-name (fcdns) and domain-name (email) report types, as those may be more applicable to Marc's purposes. Well, first thing

Re: I need MORE SPAM - You get less spam

On 7/20/10 8:53 AM, "Dave O'Neill" wrote: > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 01:39:32PM -0700, John Hardin wrote: >> I'll say it again, Marc: you'd get better response from large sites if >> you offered source code for a small SMTP daemon that did the connection >> analysis you want and sent to you just t

Re: I need MORE SPAM - You get less spam

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 01:39:32PM -0700, John Hardin wrote: I'll say it again, Marc: you'd get better response from large sites if you offered source code for a small SMTP daemon that did the connection analysis you want and sent to you just the offending IP addresses via an auditable channe

Re: First run score: 25.7 Second: 2.6

OK I've found the wrong score's log however I'm not very familiar with SA debug logs, I've added both correct 18 point and wrong 5.5 point' logs. I also added processed messages. http://rapidshare.com/files/407987154/spamd-logs.rar * * *I used

Re: disable trusted_networks and internal_networks

On 7/19/2010 8:23 PM, Matt Kettler wrote: > On 7/16/2010 2:31 PM, Cliff Hayes wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Our webmail server is on the same server as sendmail and spamassassin. >> >> I would like to filter outbound webmail but can't because the most recent >> versions of spamassassin have 127.0.0.1 tru

Re: how to make spamassassin work with ipfw?

On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 03:22 -0700, Sara Khanchi wrote: > I've just got confused with spamd/spamc pair and spamassassin! Are > these two the same with just different modes of running? Basically, yes. The client / server solution (spamc and spamd) should be used instead of the plain spamassassin scr

Re: First run score: 25.7 Second: 2.6

On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 14:53 +0300, Emin Akbulut wrote: > Does not spamd 3.3.1 (JAM) support logging? I want to log some info... > When run under Linux it logs to /var/log/maillog. Does the DOS/Windows version write log messages to stderr or does it just suppress them? > > My recent scores on s

RE: [SpamAssassin] Re: First run score: 25.7 Second: 2.6

From: Emin Akbulut [mailto:eminakbu...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 1:54 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org P.S: In my case all tests done in same input, but outputs have different scores. Does not spamd 3.3.1 (JAM) support logging? I want to log some info... My recent scores on sam

RE: [SpamAssassin] Re: First run score: 25.7 Second: 2.6

From: Emin Akbulut [mailto:eminakbu...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 1:54 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org P.S: In my case all tests done in same input, but outputs have different scores. Does not spamd 3.3.1 (JAM) support logging? I want to log some info... ___

Re: are there any alternatives to textcat?

On 07/20/2010 11:36 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > did you set up ok_languages? Yup - in general it does work - it's just that textcat doesn't seem to be able to figure out Chinese from a 5 paragraph email containing nothing but Chinese and about 5 words of English. I had a similar problem w

Re: thanks to thinking people.

> > > On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:25:26 -0700 > > > Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > >> It's been our experience that spam-scanning outbound mail causes a > > >> lot more problems than setting up mailserver monitoring and being > > >> responsive to it. Sooner or later one of your customers is going > > >>

Re: First run score: 25.7 Second: 2.6

P.S: In my case all tests done in same input, but outputs have different scores. Does not spamd 3.3.1 (JAM) support logging? I want to log some info... My recent scores on same input : ) OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=5.7 required=6.3 tests=BAYES_50,HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=

Re: First run score: 25.7 Second: 2.6

On 14.07.10 15:42, Emin Akbulut wrote: > I run SA Win32 port 3.3.1 by JAM Software on Windows Server 2008 64 bit. > Spamassassin.exe always calculates the same score, coz User_Prefs file is > under my docs (C:\Users\ea\.spamassassin) > > However spamd.exe -which runs as service- calculates the rig

Re: are there any alternatives to textcat?

On 14.07.10 12:32, Jason Haar wrote: > For some weird reason I seem to get a lot of Chinese spam - and even > with TextCat enabled, SA is unable to recognise it as Chinese (ie I want > to score on X-Spam-Languages:). I've Googled around and it looks like > TextCat ceased development some time ago,

Re: sa-update

Hello, please configure your mailer to wrap lines below 80 characters per line. 72 to 75 is usually OK. Thank you. On 11.07.10 15:18, Grant Peel wrote: > I have recently build a new server build and am not finding (appears) that > SA is not updating correctly. Why did you build 3.2.5? And how d

Re: how to make spamassassin work with ipfw?

On 20/07/2010, at 19:52, Sara Khanchi wrote: > I'm trying to make SpamAssassin work with ipfw on freebsd 8.0. I've just got > confused with spamd/spamc pair and spamassassin! Are these two the same with > just different modes of running? > I want to forward mails to SpamAssassin using ipfw fw ru

Re: how to make spamassassin work with ipfw?

Spamassassin is just a tool to check a message's 'spam score'. Then you decide the message is spam or not, ie. if the score is greater than value x the message is considered as spam. spamassassin.exe is standalone version of SA. Usage: spamassassin < input.eml > output.eml Now you got the messa

how to make spamassassin work with ipfw?

Hi everybody, I'm trying to make SpamAssassin work with ipfw on freebsd 8.0. I've just got confused with spamd/spamc pair and spamassassin! Are these two the same with just different modes of running? I want to forward mails to SpamAssassin using ipfw fw rules and then deny spams or change thei