Re: Must-Have Plugins?

Am 24.06.2015 um 02:00 schrieb Philip Prindeville: On 06/19/2015 01:07 PM, Dianne Skoll wrote: On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:51:28 -0600 Philip Prindeville wrote: [stuff] With this, we avoid ever accepting about 98% of the SPAM that we’d otherwise receive. Really? 98%? I find that surprising

Re: Must-Have Plugins?

On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 18:00:27 -0600 Philip Prindeville wrote: > I should have mentioned we also blacklist yahoo... and are thinking > about blocking google, too. I see. If we did this, then yes, we'd probably stop a lot of spam (though nowhere near 98%) but we'd also lose 98% of our customers,

Re: Must-Have Plugins?

On 06/19/2015 01:07 PM, Dianne Skoll wrote: On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:51:28 -0600 Philip Prindeville wrote: [stuff] With this, we avoid ever accepting about 98% of the SPAM that we’d otherwise receive. Really? 98%? I find that surprising. We get quite a lot of spam from gmail, hotmail, yah

Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)

Am 23.06.2015 um 21:28 schrieb Charles Sprickman: One thing to keep in mind is that you may need to rotate your spare IPs in now and then. Others can correct me, but my understanding is that all the major email providers are going to treat an IP that regularly sends email to them very differ

Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)

Jered Floyd wrote: > > Hi Ted, > > Thanks for the advice. I'm doing pretty much all of that except reserving an > alternate IP as a backup relay/smarthost. That's a good idea. > > I use one IP for almost all web traffic (going through a reverse proxy to a > VM farm), one for DNS/Kerberos,

Re: No BAYES_XX tags in X-Spam-Report

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Bill Cole wrote: >> Yes, I want a system-wide bayes db. And I am running spamd and spamc >> and I assume that is all working (but of course I have no idea if it >> really is). >> >> But I want users to be able to put spams that get through into >> ~/Maildir/.Learn

Re: bayes filtlering

On 23 Jun 2015, at 8:34, Roman Gelfand wrote: Periodically, I am running the following command on my spam box... sa-learn --no-sync --spam /mbx/adomain.com/auser/Maildir/.Junk/{cur,new} It seems to work. However, I continue to get this message type. Why? Here is SA message. X-Spam-Checker-

Re: No BAYES_XX tags in X-Spam-Report

Am 23.06.2015 um 18:48 schrieb Bill Cole: * sa-learn IS NOT THE RIGHT TOOL FOR LEARNING MESSAGES INTO A SYSTEM-WIDE DB says who? that below is the rsult of a customized sa-learn script for a ton of users working like a charm on a spamass-milter setup for 10 months now [root@mail-

Re: No BAYES_XX tags in X-Spam-Report

On 23 Jun 2015, at 0:05, Michael B Allen wrote: On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:42 PM, Bill Cole wrote: On 22 Jun 2015, at 21:45, Michael B Allen wrote: On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: [root@www .spamassassin]# pwd /var/log/spamassassin/.spamassassin [root@www .spamassas

Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)

Am 23.06.2015 um 14:57 schrieb Jered Floyd: The form does seem to have worked, and I'm not currently on the BRBL, although this morning I got bounces from a Barracuda customer for a very benign message with "rejected due to spam content," so who knows. I wish there was better visibility into t

Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)

>> The form does seem to have worked, and I'm not currently on the BRBL, >> although >> this morning I got bounces from a Barracuda customer for a very benign >> message >> with "rejected due to spam content," so who knows. I wish there was better >> visibility into the process. > > then it w

Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)

Am 23.06.2015 um 14:47 schrieb Jered Floyd: The form does seem to have worked, and I'm not currently on the BRBL, although this morning I got bounces from a Barracuda customer for a very benign message with "rejected due to spam content," so who knows. I wish there was better visibility int

Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)

Hi Ted, Thanks for the advice. I'm doing pretty much all of that except reserving an alternate IP as a backup relay/smarthost. That's a good idea. I use one IP for almost all web traffic (going through a reverse proxy to a VM farm), one for DNS/Kerberos, one for a legacy install of my MUA, a

Re: bayes filtlering

Am 23.06.2015 um 14:34 schrieb Roman Gelfand: Periodically, I am running the following command on my spam box... sa-learn --no-sync --spam /mbx/adomain.com/auser/Maildir/.Junk/{cur,new} It seems to work. However, I continue to get this message

bayes filtlering

Periodically, I am running the following command on my spam box... sa-learn --no-sync --spam /mbx/adomain.com/auser/Maildir/.Junk/{cur,new} It seems to work. However, I continue to get this message type. Why? Here is SA message. X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on mail.ad

Re: No BAYES_XX tags in X-Spam-Report

On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 02:04:03 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote: > oh and independent of not running as root you have only 301 spam > messages while the docs clearly state you need at least 400 ham as > well as 400 spam samples It's 200 of each.

Re: No BAYES_XX tags in X-Spam-Report

Am 23.06.2015 um 03:45 schrieb Michael B Allen: On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: [root@www .spamassassin]# pwd /var/log/spamassassin/.spamassassin [root@www .spamassassin]# ls -la total 1100 drwx-- 2 spamd spamd4096 Jun 22 19:42 . drwx-- 3 spamd spamd4096

Re: No BAYES_XX tags in X-Spam-Report

Am 23.06.2015 um 06:05 schrieb Michael B Allen: Yes, I want a system-wide bayes db. And I am running spamd and spamc and I assume that is all working (but of course I have no idea if it really is). But I want users to be able to put spams that get through into ~/Maildir/.LearnAsSpam and then, e

Re: .science the new leper of TLD's?

On 23.06.2015 09:18, Marc Selig wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 09:11:27AM +0200, Axb wrote: "serious" sites won't stick to that NS anyway. And private sites should not be sending e-mail anyway? Please don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. have you missed the point? If someone wants t

Re: .science the new leper of TLD's?

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 09:11:27AM +0200, Axb wrote: > "serious" sites won't stick to that NS anyway. And private sites should not be sending e-mail anyway? Please don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Re: .science the new leper of TLD's?

On 23.06.2015 08:44, Paul Stead wrote: On 19/06/15 18:46, Axb wrote: and if you run a local NS BL: ns1.alpnames.com Some of these domains look legit, not sure about sources of spam, mind? maybe, possibly, probably... a NS BL entry can add a score - doesn't have to be poison pill.

Re: No BAYES_XX tags in X-Spam-Report

On 22.06.15 19:55, Michael B Allen wrote: How can I tell if SA is tagging using bayes? [root@www .spamassassin]# pwd /var/log/spamassassin/.spamassassin [root@www .spamassassin]# ls -la total 1100 drwx-- 2 spamd spamd4096 Jun 22 19:42 . drwx-- 3 spamd spamd4096 Jun 7 00:41 ..