Re: what are these spamassain messages?

On Fri, 28 Dec 2012, Niamh Holding wrote: Hello john, Friday, December 28, 2012, 9:47:58 AM, you wrote: jf> As far as I am away I am running the latest jf> release jf> SpamAssassin version 3.2.5 That's ancient! X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) here Sorry -- there

Re: what are these spamassain messages?

>>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin A McGrail writes: Kevin> On 12/18/2012 5:32 PM, john ffitch wrote: >> I am seeing a number of these >> >> Dec 18 22:21:55 snout spamd[12744]: Odd number of elements in hash >> assignment at /usr/local/lib/perl/5.10

what are these spamassain messages?

snout spamd[12744]: RR at octet 31 corrupt/incomplete at /etc/mail/spamassassin/Botnet.pm line 717. ] Does it matter? ==John ffitch

Re: Scoring of old rules is still done

A looked at my rules for one of those snout:/var/lib/spamassassin/3.003002# grep RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL */* updates_spamassassin_org/20_mailspike.cf:meta RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L5 || RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L4 || RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L3 || __RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_Z updates_spamassassin_org/20_mailspike.cf:descr

Re: wrong RCVD_IN_PBL?

Is 1and1.co.uk in the trusted hosts? On Sat, 17 Nov 2012, umeca74 wrote: Your IP (ppp-94-68-74-194.home.otenet.gr is: 94.68.74.194) looks like a dynamic home user subscriber line (adsl, cable, dialup). that's correct PBL contains ranges of IP addresses that should never send e-mail directly

Re: use_bayes=0 completly disables report function

On Sat, 21 Apr 2012, RW wrote: That's what use_bayes 0 is for. Unless you really have to, turning-off Bayes is a bad idea. The FP rate is much higher without it. Beyes does not make much sense in a multi-user, diverse community such as my university department. Makes sense here (small c

Re: Bayes_ignore

Surely both ham and spam will have these headers so they will cancel? On Sun, 1 Apr 2012, joea wrote: While exploring Bayes stuff, (wanting to populate appropriately for my setup), found reference to removing headers that might confuse Bayes. Specifically bayes_ignore_header. The example th

Re: installation problem

Run sa-update to pull the rules? On Sat, 31 Dec 2011, Steve Blinkhorn wrote: Hi, I just tried to install spamassassin: everything proceeded normally, AFAIK, but the basic "spamassassin -t' on the provided sample fails because no rules are found (line 400, which looks to my untutored eye like an

Re: Upgraded to new spamassassin(3.3.2(, and now it won't work (no rules.....ran sa-update, nada...

Are you sure you are running the right spamd? We (at University) run SA 3.3.2 on OpenSuse with no problems, but did have to pull the rules. ==John ff On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, Linda Walsh wrote: Sorry, included that in my subject I did run sa-update, all it says (put it in verbose mode) is t

Re: Trouble starting Spamassassin

55 at /usr/bin/spamd line 2588. so does not work. I am reluctant to install a rc1 in a live system ==John ffitch

Trouble starting Spamassassin

ot had any problems with SA before so I have no experience.... ==John ffitch

Re: My Outgoing Email is Flagged as ***SPAM***?

3.4 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX The date is grossly in the future. Looks like someone has not applied the Jan 2010 patch ==John ff

sought rules

Have I missed something? I used to pull the sought rules daily, but nothing seems to have changed since 2 Nov. Is that expected behaviour? ==John ffitch

Re: Stop Counting!

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, LuKreme wrote: I was thinking that, particularly for people who trash messages over a certain threshold and are worried about the SA overhead, a stop-counting threshold might be a good idea. So, for example, for my personal mail I could set stop_counting at 7.0, once a