Just wanted to throw in my two cents here - I have spoken to USPS about this
and they said that they never send out these messages unless the client
requests them, and that it should be safe to completely block messages like
this.
The same cannot be said about UPS and FexEx, by the way.
> ---
Hey all -
Does anybody know how long the string needs to be to trigger SUBJ_ALL_CAPS?
I know it has to be multi-word and over a certain length. Was wondering the
specific length. Thanks in advance J
Hey, all -
I'm trying to whitelist all our internal subdomains but I can't seem to get
it to work.
We have so many of them that it's impractical to do them individually. For
instance, we have _...@logs.domain.com, @admin-sql.domani.com etc. etc. etc.
I was thinking that whitelist_from *
I just had to weigh in here to say that we have DCC_CHECK scored up to a 4, and
all of these kinds of spam messages get caught by that because they always hit
at least another 1 point worth of rules.
Also, those two rules require plugins, I believe.
> -Original Message-
> From: Juer
PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: "Chain" rules?
>
> On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Andrew Talbot wrote:
>
> > Is there a way to "chain" rules together such that one rule will only
> > fire if another is hit?
> >
> > Specifically, w
Hey all -
Is there a way to "chain" rules together such that one rule will only fire
if another is hit?
Specifically, we have a client that is getting hit with a bunch of messages
that are just links, but the links contain sex words. We want to do a body
scan for a list of sex words if and
3 3:38 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Rule to scan for .html attachments?
>
> On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 14:45 -0400, Andrew Talbot wrote:
> > I need it to fire on any HTML attachment. The modules are enabled. I
> > can get it to pick up text/html, remember,
HTML files attached.
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Gregorie [mailto:mar...@gregorie.org]
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 2:35 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Rule to scan for .html attachments?
>
> On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 14:10 -0400, Andrew Tal
t; Subject: Re: Rule to scan for .html attachments?
>
> On Fri, 31 May 2013 14:10:36 -0400
> Andrew Talbot wrote:
>
> > That didn't work :(
>
> What didn't work? Oh... you top-posted.
>
> Anyway... you might need a "full" rule, which can be ex
Didn't work with mime_header (or mimeheader) with either rule.
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Axb wrote:
> On 05/31/2013 05:51 PM, Andrew Talbot wrote:
>
>> Hey all -
>>
>> I'm trying to set up a custom rule that scores HTML attachments.
>>
>>
That didn't work :(
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 11:51 -0400, Andrew Talbot wrote:
> > I'm trying to set up a custom rule that scores HTML attachments.
> >
> ..snippage..
>
> > I found this :
> heade
Hey all -
I'm trying to set up a custom rule that scores HTML attachments.
The problem I'm running across is that using a rule like this one:
mimeheader HTML_ATTACH Content-Type =~ /^text\/html/i
Will flag all messages that come in as HTML (vs. plain text).
I found this :
header HTML_ATTACH_RUL
9, 2013 at 3:13 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
> On 28.05.13 16:43, Andrew Talbot wrote:
>
>> That said, I'm wondering if it's redundant to run DCC and Bayes at the
>> same
>> time? From what I understand, DCC is a subscription-based service, so it
>> would
ure.
Bayes performs beautifully in my test environment. I just need to find
that extra "WOW" factor. I thought that saving the cost on DCC would be it
but ... That didn't seem to make a difference. Go figure.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:02 AM, RW wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 201
;ve got
no idea.
I just work here, Dave! :)
Thank you for your response.
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Dave Warren wrote:
> On 2013-05-28 13:43, Andrew Talbot wrote:
>
>> As some of you may have known from talking with me over the past few
>> weeks, I've been having a diffic
Hey all -
I've got two questions:
1-
We're running Bayes and DCC on our server, and we've just been running
Bayes locally to see how well it works. It's been about three weeks now so
I finally really started poring over the results.
One thing I noticed that I thought was a particularly interest
Hey all -
I set up Bayes with autolearning a few weeks ago. It took forever to get
started, but now it seems like the learning speed has accelerated.
Is the autolearning supposed to accelerate? I can't help but feel like it
may just be feeding itself it's own data or something.
.
So here goes!!
Thanks for all your help.
> -Original Message-
> From: Karsten Bräckelmann [mailto:guent...@rudersport.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 8:18 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Default Bayes Database
>
> On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 14
ing.
> -Original Message-
> From: Axb [mailto:axb.li...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 1:32 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Default Bayes Database
>
> On 05/08/2013 07:26 PM, Andrew Talbot wrote:
> > Hey all -
> >
>
Hey all -
I remember seeing somewhere that there was a default Bayes database for
Bayes to start using right away, but can't seem to find that information
again on the Wiki or in my notes.
Can someone please help?
0
> Steve Freegard wrote:
>
> > On 01/05/13 19:40, Andrew Talbot wrote:
> > > Hi, Seve -
> > >
> > > Thanks for your response. Is that just for performance reasons?
> > >
> >
> > Performance is one of the things that bayes_auto_learn_on_er
On 01/05/13 19:14, Axb wrote:
> > On 05/01/2013 08:01 PM, Andrew Talbot wrote:
> >
> >> Any suggestions any of you have for a Bayes newbie - about what I
> >> just asked or otherwise - would be very much appreciated.
> >
> > I advocate autolearning as it has al
sassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Bayes Autolearning
>
> On 05/01/2013 08:01 PM, Andrew Talbot wrote:
>
> > Any suggestions any of you have for a Bayes newbie - about what I just
> > asked or otherwise - would be very much appreciated.
>
> I advocate autolearning as it h
Hey All -
I'm about to set up Bayes on one of our mail servers. A lot of the
documentation says that I need to manually sift through a few hundred
messages and classify them to 'teach' the filter, and it sounds like I may
need to do that on an ongoing basis.
That is not a very plausible so
at 18:45 -0400, Andrew Talbot wrote:
> I like your point about the portmanteau rules (and I award you two
> Points for using one of my favorite words in a new - yet appropriate -
> manner!).
>
:-)
> I never thought about scoring each rule as a 0.001 or something really
> l
longer rules or fewer shorter ones?
On Wed, 2013-04-24 at 12:32 -0400, Andrew Talbot wrote:
> I have my customized deployment split up into a bunch of separate CF
> files (by category) and I have those further split up into rules based
> on score.
>
I also use very long rules,
-Original Message-
From: John Hardin [mailto:jhar...@impsec.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 1:53 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: More longer rules or fewer shorter ones?
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013, Andrew Talbot wrote:
> John,
>
> Thanks for your prompt response!
>
M
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: More longer rules or fewer shorter ones?
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013, Andrew Talbot wrote:
> Hey, all -
>
> I have my customized deployment split up into a bunch of separate CF
> files (by category) and I have those further split up into rules
Hey, all -
I have my customized deployment split up into a bunch of separate CF files
(by category) and I have those further split up into rules based on score.
So, I have a bunch of stuff like:
header RULE_1 Subject =~ /\b(this|that|theother|blah|blah)/i
score RULE_1 1
describe RULE_
29 matches
Mail list logo
