2010/1/30 Andy Dorman :
> Today (Friday) around 1600 GMT, Jan 29, we experienced a large drop (almost
> 50%) in spam connections. And since then we have seen anywhere from 25% to
> 40% less spam volume than is normal.
>
> Anyone else see something similar? From what we have seen, this is almost
>
Hi
2010/1/22 Stephane MAGAND :
> Hello,
>
> In a previous post, i have request a information, can i use one
> central bayes database
> for a lot of SpamAssassin Server.
>
> I have received a answer: Yes
>
> But what is the process ?
I use a common bayes database for all users ;
I added :
use_baye
Hi
2010/1/15 Ted Mittelstaedt :
> Yeah, this patch was discussed close to 6 years ago:
>
> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/spamass-milt-list/2004-03/msg00014.html
>
> Unfortunately although the spamass-milter maintainer said he would
> add this, he never did, and the project appears to have b
2010/1/15 Mariusz Kruk :
> Your initial question was not "how to not run articular messages thru
> SA", but "How to score on existing spam headers". That's a different
> issue.
I wanted to mark as spam, mais already tagged spam . At the end of the
day, I achieve the same result.
> As I wrote bef
Hi
2010/1/14 Mariusz Kruk :
> BTW, as the check definitions seem to be pretty ok at first glance, did
> you set scoring for those rules, or did you just add the rules?
> You should get something like:
Yes, I do try with score associated. I just posted the regex to
simplify thing ; I tried all the
2010/1/15 Matus UHLAR - fantomas :
>
> that's just what I said - don't run mail through SA _again_.
Uh Duh!
Do you think I'll be asking here if I knew how to do it?
>
> Note that primary MX can score differently expecially if your users use
> BAYES, AWL etc. In suich case it may be desired to r
2010/1/14 brodos :
>
> Ok. Thanks!
> Is there any security risks when running SA-update as root?
According to the SA doc: then don't enable user rules.. (they are
disabled by default)
2010/1/14 Matus UHLAR - fantomas :
> well, you either trust SA on secondary MX - then don't run the mail through
> SA again.
But not all mails go through the 2nd MX ; so this is exactly what I
want to do: don't run SA if it went through the 2nd MX and was tagged
as spam.
Hi
I have spamassassin running on both my primary and secondary mail
servers. Often, some spammers send through the secondary mail server ;
which will then tag them as spam.
When the same message goes through the primary mail server , it is
tagged as spam once again.
Sometimes one server tags it
I found this optional patch in the FreeBSD ports.
It does exactly what I want ; bypass all test if the message was sent
over an authenticated connection...
Could easily be adapted to simply add an extra header for spamassassin
to check on
diff -u orig/spamass-milter.1.in spamass-milter.1.in
---
Hi there
2010/1/14 David B Funk :
> A caveat, as you're using sendmail with a milter, be aware that the milter
> taps into the mail stream -before- the local sendmail "Received" header is
> added. Therefore the milter has to synthesize the "Received" header
> itself (to mimic what sendmail will cr
n-Yves Avenard
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-47--477649399
Subject: test #2
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:54:35 +1100
Message-Id: <779545a2-1d20-4373-81dd-b12f7bdc8...@hydrix.com>
To: Jean-Yves Avenard
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077)
X-Mailer: Apple
Hi
Mail system is made of
Sendmail as MTA -> spamass-milter -> spamd
Legitimate users are using the sendmail server over TLS and first need
to authenticate themselves before being able to post.
Is there a way to have a particular score if the sender has
succesfully authenticated ?
Like if the s
13 matches
Mail list logo
