Re: Spam messages bypassing SA

2014-10-23 Thread John Hardin
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, geoff.spamassassin140...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote: On 04/09/2014 15:56, John Hardin wrote: On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, Geoff Soper wrote: > I've got an issue whereby spam messages seem to be somehow bypassing SA > and getting into my inbox. > > : 0fw: spamassassin.lock > * <

Re: unsubscribe

2014-10-23 Thread Bob Proulx
David Bennett wrote: > unsubscribe Please don't send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list members. Send unsubscribe requests to the -unsubscribe address. For this mailing list it is . See the SpamAssassin wiki page on mailing lists for more information. https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassi

Re: SpamCop Not Reporting

2014-10-23 Thread David B Funk
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, sah62 wrote: I'm running SpamAssassin version 3.4.0 with Perl version 5.18.2 on a server running Ubuntu 14.04.1 LTS. I recently noticed that I'm not getting reports sent to SpamCop, but as far as I can tell everything seems to be configured correctly. There are just no repor

Re: Spam messages bypassing SA

2014-10-23 Thread geoff . spamassassin140903
On 23/10/2014 23:00, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 10/23/2014 5:47 PM, geoff.spamassassin140...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote: On 04/09/2014 11:29, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Using procmail without MTA glue is OK for many uses. I am wondering how many spamd connections you allow and if you have checked you

Re: Spam messages bypassing SA

2014-10-23 Thread Kevin A. McGrail
On 10/23/2014 5:47 PM, geoff.spamassassin140...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote: On 04/09/2014 11:29, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Using procmail without MTA glue is OK for many uses. I am wondering how many spamd connections you allow and if you have checked your logs? I also cannot remember but the uses

Re: Spam messages bypassing SA

2014-10-23 Thread Axb
On 10/23/2014 11:51 PM, geoff.spamassassin140...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote: On 04/09/2014 15:56, John Hardin wrote: On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, Geoff Soper wrote: I've got an issue whereby spam messages seem to be somehow bypassing SA and getting into my inbox. :0fw: spamassassin.lock * < 40 | spamc

Re: .link TLD spammer haven?

2014-10-23 Thread Martin Gregorie
On Thu, 2014-10-23 at 17:20 +0200, Axb wrote: > As there's a bunch of other new TLDs being abused I would higly recomend > updating RegistrarBoundaries.pm > from > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Util/RegistrarBoundaries.pm > > on a Redhat flavour it go

Re: Spam messages bypassing SA

2014-10-23 Thread geoff . spamassassin140903
On 04/09/2014 15:56, John Hardin wrote: On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, Geoff Soper wrote: I've got an issue whereby spam messages seem to be somehow bypassing SA and getting into my inbox. :0fw: spamassassin.lock * < 40 | spamc -x Are the messages that bypass SA always rather large? No, unfortu

Re: Spam messages bypassing SA

2014-10-23 Thread geoff . spamassassin140903
On 04/09/2014 11:29, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Using procmail without MTA glue is OK for many uses. I am wondering how many spamd connections you allow and if you have checked your logs? I also cannot remember but the uses of a lock file seem odd for something that can thread. Any one know if

Re: unsubscribe

2014-10-23 Thread John Hardin
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, David Bennett wrote: unsubscribe ...here we go again. -- John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ jhar...@impsec.orgFALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79 --

Re: unsubscribe

2014-10-23 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 23.10.2014 um 23:17 schrieb David Bennett: unsubscribe and now? https://www.google.at/search?q=spamassassin+mailing+list+unsubscribe signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

unsubscribe

2014-10-23 Thread David Bennett
unsubscribe

SpamCop Not Reporting

2014-10-23 Thread sah62
I'm running SpamAssassin version 3.4.0 with Perl version 5.18.2 on a server running Ubuntu 14.04.1 LTS. I recently noticed that I'm not getting reports sent to SpamCop, but as far as I can tell everything seems to be configured correctly. There are just no reports visible at spamcop.net and nothing

Re: .link TLD spammer haven?

2014-10-23 Thread Martin Gregorie
On Thu, 2014-10-23 at 09:31 -0700, sah62 wrote: > With approximately two thousand new top-level domains > > > in the queue for delegation this method of manually documenting validity is > not going to scale well. > I

Re: .link TLD spammer haven?

2014-10-23 Thread sah62
Axb wrote > On 10/23/2014 05:03 PM, Jesse Stroik wrote: >> Martin (and others), >> >> >>> As others have already said, URI body rules use a list of valid TLDs to >>> help with recognising URIs embedded in body text and this list is >>> currently hardcoded into SA. >> >> >> Thank you for the explana

Re: .link TLD spammer haven?

2014-10-23 Thread Axb
On 10/23/2014 05:03 PM, Jesse Stroik wrote: Martin (and others), As others have already said, URI body rules use a list of valid TLDs to help with recognising URIs embedded in body text and this list is currently hardcoded into SA. Thank you for the explanation and the rule. I've put it in

Re: .link TLD spammer haven?

2014-10-23 Thread Jesse Stroik
Martin (and others), As others have already said, URI body rules use a list of valid TLDs to help with recognising URIs embedded in body text and this list is currently hardcoded into SA. Thank you for the explanation and the rule. I've put it in place and it appears to work fine with my fi

Re: General rules for training bayes

2014-10-23 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
but do you train mail from mass-mailers? Staples? Facebook? Banks? why not? of course I train if I want such mail to be properly classified later. On 22.10.14 14:36, Alex Regan wrote: The problem I've had with doing this is that it's often so difficult to determine which bulk message shoul