On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 05:24:00PM +, Justin Mason wrote:
>
>Jim Maul writes:
>> Justin Mason wrote:
>> > John D. Hardin writes:
>> >> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, George Georgalis wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 09:41:58AM -0800
ch can kill remaining tests and short circut. eg anytime in the
hierachy the score is above what the negative test can fix, etc.
Appreciate the discussion thus far, unfortunately discussion is
all I'm able to contribute at this time.
Thanks,
// George
--
George Georgalis, information system scientist <
n all tests)
Another approach might be simpler to integrate than above, simply
do all the negative score tests first and pull out if the score
gets to spam level.
// George
--
George Georgalis, information system scientist <
On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 09:50:26PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>George Georgalis wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 11:46:58AM -0400, George Georgalis wrote:
>>
>>> How can I disable the use of ~/.spamassassin altogether?
>>>
>>
>> nevermind...
&
On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 11:46:58AM -0400, George Georgalis wrote:
>How can I disable the use of ~/.spamassassin altogether?
nevermind...
--siteconfigpath=$CONF
// George
--
George Georgalis, information system scientist <
version 3.1.2
How can I disable the use of ~/.spamassassin altogether?
// George
--
George Georgalis, information system scientist <
to_whitelist 0
disabling use_auto_whitelist is only required without --nouser-config
thanks!
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator <
http://galis.org/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 07:20:31PM -0400, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
>On 5/29/2006 5:20 PM, George Georgalis wrote:
>>Looking at this block from above SpamAssassin.pm line 1469,
>>it's not clear to me how to avoid the warning/errors listed below.
>>
>>note: I&#x
le or directory
2006-05-29_21:11:05.03684 [24350] warn: auto-whitelist: open of auto-whitelist
file failed: locker: safe_lock: cannot create tmp lockfile /var/qmail/.spam
assassin/auto-whitelist.lock.run.galis.org.24350 for
/var/qmail/.spamassassin/auto-whitelist.lock: No such file or directory
: rulesemporium.com 28800 A 216.218.134.27
answer: www.rulesemporium.com 28800 A 216.218.134.27
if it is coming offline, um, well the other NS servers don't know that.
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator <
http://galis.org/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
134.27
rulesemporium.com = 38.99.66.94
The rules seem at rulesemporium.com, but my scripts use www.rulesemporium.com
*sigh*
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator <
http://galis.org/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ew days since I tried
to connect, but I've not been able to connect at all from
66.250.170.210.
How can I go about finding why I was blacklisted? It would be nice
to get an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on the occasion of being blacklisted
from this service.
// George
--
George Georgali
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 03:47:24PM -0400, George Georgalis wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 03:24:50PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>>George Georgalis wrote:
>>
>>> grep -r REPORT /etc/spamassassin/ /usr/share/spamassassin/
>>> returned nothing that wasn't
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 05:31:13PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>George Georgalis wrote:
>
>>
>> Well since my MTA doesn't have an IP put in the header (it gets
>> mail from stdin -- and SA runs from stdin forwarding the exit code
>> to the MTA which then accept
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 03:45:56PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>George Georgalis wrote:
>> In my setup, trusted relays arn't tested with SA, they go straight
>> to the queue. Untrusted networks must negociate SA in SMTP. I've
>> visited this configuration issue
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 03:24:50PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>George Georgalis wrote:
>
>> grep -r REPORT /etc/spamassassin/ /usr/share/spamassassin/
>> returned nothing that wasn't attached to other characters.
>
>Hmm.. what about greping /etc/resolv.conf?
nothing
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 02:49:50PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>George Georgalis wrote:
>> 2005-09-07 13:49:10.975816500 logmsg: checking message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> for geo:1002.
>> 2005-09-07 13:49:10.986551500 debug: received-header: parsed as [
&g
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 02:47:04PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>Fred wrote:
>> George Georgalis wrote:
>>
>>>Argument "REPORT" isn't numeric in
>>>subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl/5.6.1/IO/Socket/INET.pm line 223,
>>> line 58. 2005-09-07
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 02:15:09PM -0400, Fred wrote:
>George Georgalis wrote:
>> Argument "REPORT" isn't numeric in
>> subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl/5.6.1/IO/Socket/INET.pm line 223,
>> line 58. 2005-09-07 13:49:11.026387500 Argument "REPORT" i
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 11:35:53AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>George Georgalis wrote:
>> it would seem the following rule is not being used...
>>
>> header __RCVD_IN_SBL_XBLeval:check_rbl('sblxbl',
>> 'sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org.')
>> de
Plugin::URIDNSBL but maybe I need another plugin?
What's missing?
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator <
http://galis.org/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
stderr 2>&1
==> /service/spamd/log/run <==
#!/bin/sh
exec setuidgid log multilog t /var/log/spamd
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator <
http://galis.org/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 01:06:11PM +, Nix wrote:
>> An interesting technique that allows a program (such as a log writer)
>> to run as an unprivileged user, while receiving privileged data. (taken
>> almost verbatim from Gerrit Pape's socklog)
>>
>> #!/bin/sh
>> exec > exec 2>&1
>> exec softl
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 12:19:53 -0500, George Georgalis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 11:58:14AM -0500, George Georgalis wrote:
> >On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 01:37:03PM +, Nix wrote:
> >>On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, George Georgalis uttered the following:
&g
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 11:58:14AM -0500, George Georgalis wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 01:37:03PM +, Nix wrote:
>>On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, George Georgalis uttered the following:
>>> I recall a problem a while back with a pipe from
>>> /proc/kmsg that was sent
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 01:37:03PM +, Nix wrote:
>On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, George Georgalis uttered the following:
>> I recall a problem a while back with a pipe from
>> /proc/kmsg that was sent by root to a program with a
>> user uid. The fix was to run the logging program
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 04:53:58PM -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
>At 04:40 PM 3/3/2005, George Georgalis wrote:
>>This log entry indicates when I booted into 2.6.11:
>>2005-03-02 12:05:47.018334500 2005-03-02 17:05:47 [781] i: server killed
>>by SIGTERM, shutting down
>
>
Is anyone successfully runing SA on a 2.6.11 linux kernel?
>On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 02:16:03 -0500, George Georgalis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm very defiantly seeing a problem with the 2.6.11
>> kernel and my spamassassin setup. However, it's not
>> clea
>On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 02:16:03 -0500, George Georgalis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm very defiantly seeing a problem with the 2.6.11
>> kernel and my spamassassin setup. However, it's not
>> clear exactly where the problem is, seems like sa
>> but
m fairly certain. If anyone is experiencing
the problem please contact me on or off the list.
A sure sign of it is no logs (with debug) for remote
sa connections which score "0/0" and correct operation
with "cat spam.txt | spamc -R"; fix is to use the
older kernel.
// George
>>-Original Message-
>>From: George Georgalis
>>Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 10:15 AM
>>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>>Subject: Re: [SARE] Rules updates: URI
>
>Regarding the comment on too much disclosure in the logs, there is
>nothing keep
I can't
>be sure.
I'm overloaded and haven't had the chance to try...
>George Georgalis (and others): I've made a first pass at incorporating
>your suggestions for a change log into these files. There's a new
>file, http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sa
E1 RULE2 RULE3 RULE4 RULE5 RULE6
#@@# removed OLDRULEa OLDRULEb OLDRULEc OLDRULEd OLDRULEe
#@@# changed FAVORITEa FAVORITEb FAVORITEc FAVORITEd FAVORITEe
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
;>
>I don't understand... I assume you would prefer the notification to not
>knowing it was updated at all...?
The behavior is fine, just add the output of "grep '#@@#' newfile.cf"
to the ${MESSAGES} whether lint failed or not. (Once changes get that
tag.) I can send
nough.
btw - I don't feel good about askin. I appreciate the rules being made
available in the first place. And would be happy to send a case of real
beer to a deserving fridge, in any event. Feel free to send address
offlist.
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ribute files,
it is widely used to distribute incremental changes to OS source in the
BSD world, and allows easy checkout of particular revisions or revision
sets. That should be straight forward with a cvs ruleset repository in
place. I'm not sure if SVN has a cvsup equivalent.)
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mment designed
#@@# for grep-ing would be useful for the casual RDJ user to monitor
#@@# what automatic updates are doing, as well as function to notify the
#@@# enterprise admin of the changes he needs to validate, and integrate
#@@# with his private rules.
If you are going through the trouble of publishing your rulesets for
the ease of others to use, I don't see the point of forcing them to
submit trust or manually discover changes when you publish them.
Regards,
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
is really okay. I'd just assume see a change log as part of
the notification that new rules have been loaded (or that lint prevented
those changes from happening).
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rather than squelching custom site rules, I think it more appropriate
to verbosely report why rules become obsoleted (not necessarily in the
new ruleset). Maybe a changes file for each cf file is appropriate? You
cannot guarantee what or how anything is done in a local config, let the
admin who cre
es for them but they seem gone now...
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
s published and RDJ is further modified to update, and use that file
(if undefined in config). The upgrade should be seamless for everyone.
I'm happy to add that code to my patch if the author(s) wouldn't prefer
doing themself. Thanks!
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 09:46:55AM -0800, Justin Mason wrote:
>George Georgalis writes:
>> On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 01:03:02PM +, Sean Doherty wrote:
>> >On Tue, 2004-11-02 at 12:50, George Georgalis wrote:
>> >> >Do you mean -0.001? Why would you want to p
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 03:40:02PM +, Sean Doherty wrote:
>On Tue, 2004-11-02 at 15:16, George Georgalis wrote:
>
>> >> The setup I use routes mail at the tcp level, it's basically impossible
>> >> for a message to reach spam assassin if it's from
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 01:03:02PM +, Sean Doherty wrote:
>On Tue, 2004-11-02 at 12:50, George Georgalis wrote:
>> >Do you mean -0.001? Why would you want to penalise mail
>> >coming thru a trusted path?
>>
>> It really doesn't matter to me what the s
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 10:24:57AM +, Sean Doherty wrote:
>On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 20:37, George Georgalis wrote:
>
>> skip_rbl_checks 1
>> use_bayes 0
>>
>> noautolearn 1
>> use_auto_whitelist 0
>> score AWL 0.001
>>
>> trusted_netwo
On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 03:13:50PM -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
>At 02:11 PM 11/1/2004, George Georgalis wrote:
>>those false negatives are also growing an AWL, which I also don't want.
>>
>>-1.4 AWLAWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
>>
On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 02:03:36PM -0500, George Georgalis wrote:
>In any event, how is it disabled? I'm getting false negatives...
>
>-2.8 ALL_TRUSTEDDid not pass through any untrusted hosts
>
>In my setup SA doesn't get _any_ trusted network connection
I don't want SA even checking the network. how do
I disable it completely?
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
48 matches
Mail list logo
