I highly recommend it. But again, not the low MX. You'd be playing
with fire there.
--
Jon Trulson | A828 C19D A087 F20B DFED
mailto:j...@radscan.com | 67C9 6F32 31AB E647 B345
"What can be asserted without evidence, can also be dismissed
w
from a bot-net vs. a 'lone wolf'?
--
"I drank what?" | Jon Trulson
-Socrates | mailto:j...@radscan.com
| A828 C19D A087 F20B DFED
| 67C9 6F32 31AB E647 B345
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Jon Trulson wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, Anthony Peacock wrote:
I zeroed the scores for all of these rules about a year ago. They were
only hitting on SPAM emails and pushing them into the FN range.
I second that - habeas
about a year ago. They were only
hitting on SPAM emails and pushing them into the FN range.
I second that - habeas stopped being useful a long time ago (IMO of
course :). Just zero them out.
--
Happy cheese in fear | Jon Trulson
against oppressor, rebel!| mai
cut your server load.
I'm also providing a public server to harvest fake MX info to help build my
blacklist. You can use this host for your fake high numbered MX. (Not a low
numbered MX though)
Que the spamvertising...
mail.yourdomain.com 10
tarbaby.junkemailfilter.
o the count there.
Has anyone done anything like this?
Any suggestions on how to do it?
Any other way to get the count?
man mailstats
--
Happy cheese in fear | Jon Trulson
against oppressor, rebel!| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brocolli, hostage. -Unknown| #include
ure!) spam.
I definitely love my spamassassins :)
--
Happy cheese in fear | Jon Trulson
against oppressor, rebel!| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brocolli, hostage. -Unknown| #include
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Luis Hernán Otegui wrote:
2007/9/12, Jon Trulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Jason Bertoch wrote:
On Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:07 PM Marc Perkel wrote:
The details are a little to complex for this forum ...
OK - had quite a few trolls here wh
there any chance we can get a moderator on this, please? This is clearly not
a SA topic and I'm weary of insults, flames, and advertisements from Marc.
FWIW, +1
--
Jon Trulson
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#include
"No Kill I" -Horta
yway, it is unwise to pin pass/fail on RBL's. They can be
wrong, or go away.
--
Jon Trulson
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#include
"No Kill I" -Horta
would speculate that was the reason your messages started tagging as spam.
One such list I remember was ordb.org.
Yes, ordb. Knew it was something like that. It may be true that
they posted something to a list - unfortunately, I was not
subscribed.
Nonetheless, we won't do that ag
A eventually before
entering our internal mail system. Works great.
--
Jon Trulson
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#include
"No Kill I" -Horta
day's
stock onslaught. Without hard data available at the moment,
I'd guess we are seeing a less than a third of what we were
getting 24hrs ago.
--
Jon Trulson
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#include
"No Kill I" -Horta
99) is
still catching every one for me. There may be something else
going wrong with your setup - no idea what offhand though,
sorry.
--
Jon Trulson
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#include
"No Kill I" -Horta
ee the previous threads
about bumping up the scores for bayes 95 and 99. YMMV of
course, but it has been *extremely* successful at work and at
home in the few years we've been using spamassassin.
Expect them to adapt. It's their job after all. Use a
0.0001 3.5 3.5
I would second that definitely. I only upped the bayes 95 and
99 rules to the pre3.0 scores - didn't mess with the others.
--
Jon Trulson
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#include
"No Kill I" -Horta
aught with bayes 99
as well :)
I guess YMMV of course, but it's worked well here w/o the need
to come up with custom rules every time some new spammer trick
rolls around.
--
Jon Trulson
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#include
"No Kill I" -Horta
27;s
definitely on the rise from where I sit.
At home, I've also seen an increase - approx 150 a
day from around 80-90 previously.
--
Jon Trulson
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#include
"No Kill I" -Horta
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Rob McEwen (PowerView Systems) wrote:
Jon Trulson said:
Hehe, that is an old spammer trick... Our secondary MX is
pretty much 100% spam.
I implemented greylisting on the secondary which reduced spam
through it by about 99% :) The secondary does not do spam
scanning, it&#
ndary which reduced spam
through it by about 99% :) The secondary does not do spam
scanning, it's simply store and forward. Greylisting really
helps in these cases.
--
Jon Trulson
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://radscan.com/~jon
#include
"No Kill I" -Horta
t sort of problem?
Yours faithfully,
Valery
--
Jon Trulsonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ID: 1A9A2B09, FP: C23F328A721264E7 B6188192EC733962
PGP keys at http://radscan.com/~jon/PGPKeys.txt
#include
"I am Nomad." -Nomad
they are being trapped...
--
Jon Trulsonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ID: 1A9A2B09, FP: C23F328A721264E7 B6188192EC733962
PGP keys at http://radscan.com/~jon/PGPKeys.txt
#include
"I am Nomad." -Nomad
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Jon Trulson wrote:
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Justin Mason wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The --max-children=1 flag to spamd has 'solved' the issue for me...
Sorry, that should be '--max-conn-per-child=1'.
--
Jon Trulsonmailto:
no custom rulesets with v3 currently. At least on my
system, the memory issues had nothing to do with a custom ruleset or 3.
The --max-children=1 flag to spamd has 'solved' the issue for
me... Average child size is around 19-20MB, until 'the event' happens, at
which point it j
that do not get through 2.6x are
generally (a) those that match BAYES_99, which by itself in the
default configuration is no longer a large enough score to make me
happy, or
True. Some spam we get is soley BAYES_99. I've bumped it back up
to 5.2 (like in 2.6x).
--
Jon Trulsonmailto:[EMA
er at catching spam than 2.63 was (out of the box).
With 2.64, we avaraged about 10 or so spams below threshold (5.0).
Now it's about 1, and some days, none :) Worth the upgrade IMO.
--
Jon Trulsonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ID: 1A9A2B09, FP: C23F328A721264E7 B6188192EC733962
PGP ke
on a whitelist
or bayes database maintenance event of some sort.
Better question.
Of all the folks seeing memory issues, are you using ok_languages in
your config somewhere? If not, please speak up as well.
I am using 'ok_locales en'.
--
Jon Trulsonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ID: 1A
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Jon Trulson wrote:
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Michael Parker wrote:
On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 10:53:30AM -0600, Jon Trulson wrote:
FWIW, in our case a child would go to 320MB and just stay there
until the child was terminated (even after finishing a message). We do
use AWL and
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Michael Parker wrote:
On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 10:53:30AM -0600, Jon Trulson wrote:
FWIW, in our case a child would go to 320MB and just stay there
until the child was terminated (even after finishing a message). We do
use AWL and bayes.
Is it possible to try and find the
even after finishing a message). We do
use AWL and bayes.
Michael
--
Jon Trulsonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ID: 1A9A2B09, FP: C23F328A721264E7 B6188192EC733962
PGP keys at http://radscan.com/~jon/PGPKeys.txt
#include
"I am Nomad." -Nomad
ipped through
since I enabled it Sunday.
OTOH, SA 3.0 seems to be doing a *much* better job at catching
spam. Big improvement over 2.6x, so I'll keep it :)
Thanks,
Michael
--
Jon Trulsonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ID: 1A9A2B09, FP: C23F328A721264E7 B6188192EC733962
PGP keys at http://radsca
mewhat more beefy host.
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004 15:09:50 -0500, Doug Block <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I had this problem till I set the max per child option to = 1
This caused spamd to kill the process used to scan every msg once it's
done.
Not the best answer I know but it keeps it in check
ing memory... Seems
pretty much strange to me...
Same thing I saw, except in my case, it was 320MB. Once a child
had it, it never let it go until terminated (or hit the default 200
connection limit).
[...]
--
Jon Trulsonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ID: 1A9A2B09, FP: C23F328A721264E7 B6188192EC
processes instead of as a daemon. The load time was never terribly
bad, and they certainly can't leak.
See my response in a previous thread on this problem. For kicks,
try --max-conn-per-child=1 to spamd see and see if your machine will last
longer :) Mine did...
--
Jon Trulson
use of
this?
Thanks,
Shane
--
Shane Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Network/System Consultant
GPG KeyID: 777CBF3F
Key fingerprint: 254F B2AC 9939 C715 278C DA95 4109 9F69 777C BF3F
Listening to: The Courtship of Birdy Numnum - The
Parapalegic-Homoerotic Episode
--
Shane Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTE
35 matches
Mail list logo
