On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 9:31 PM, John Hardin wrote:
> Justin, can you provide any enlightenment? If the base Sought dynamic
> ruleset is indeed dead, can the wiki page be updated?
>
hi folks --
I've been in contact with some of the dev team regarding handing over the
sought ruleset backends… it'
it could be that whoever was uploading the fraud corpora which the
ruleset builds from is no longer doing so. I'll take a look later
on...
--j.
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> Axb skrev den 2013-04-12 10:17:
>
>
>> all I'm seeing in that file is
>>
>> meta JM_SOUGHT_1
On Sunday, June 12, 2011, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
> On 6/12/2011 12:32 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
>
> On 6/11/2011 10:03 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>
> guys -- I'm going to make the whole question moot (in trunk at least)
> -- the only reason SOUGHT and SOUGHT_FRAUD were
guys -- I'm going to make the whole question moot (in trunk at least)
-- the only reason SOUGHT and SOUGHT_FRAUD were being checked in there
was to make their accuracy visible in ruleqa. It's been months since
I've looked at that, so it's needless. I'll remove them from svn
asap.
--j.
2011/6/11
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:26, Mark Martinec wrote:
> On Wednesday May 18 2011 09:42:55 monolit wrote:
>> >> do you have any experience with usage of SQLITE database as storage for
>> >> Spamassassin? Spamassassin uses Berkeley DB, but I need to replace it.
>> >> I could not find any manual, guide
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 22:51, Adam Katz wrote:
> RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL has 99% overlap with the SA3.3 set and 98% with the
> SA3.2 set. That leaves 0.6758% of spam uniquely hitting this DNSBL (1%
> of its 67.5822%). RCVD_IN_SEMBLACK has the same story, resulting in
> 0.5138% unique spam from its 1%
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 12:59, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
> On 1/17/2011 11:46 PM, Jeff Chan wrote:
>>
>> So a couple points:
>>
>> 1. Subscribing to lists opens up lots of grey areas including
>> the above.
>>
>> 2. Some of the areas are very difficult to resolve into spam or
>> ham. Some more a
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 14:24, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> On 11/8/2010 6:04 PM, Lawrence @ Rogers wrote:
>> On 08/11/2010 12:06 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
>>>
>>> Fair enough - fortunately I've not seen any of those here so assumed
>>> a genuine facebook mail had maybe slipped through into the corpus by
>>>
guys, feel free to mail me samples (offlist) of sought FPs -- ideally,
as mboxes. it's easy enough to add them to the training process.
--j.
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 22:54, mouss wrote:
> Le 20/08/2010 17:12, Jan P. Kessler a écrit :
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> we use spamassassin with the sought ruleset si
btw, I think this is already possible using the shortcircuit plugin.
Just use rule priorities to run the non-net rules first, and
shortcircuit if they are sufficient.
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 08:05, Henrik K wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 02:23:00AM -0400, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
>> On 10/
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 02:03, RW wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 17:36:36 -0700 (PDT)
> joker_ft top-posted:
>
>> Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> >
>> > On søn 29 aug 2010 17:28:52 CEST, joker_ft wrote
>> >
>> >> Does anyone know some public corpus updates in 2010 ? or why the
>> >> spam assassin public c
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 04:30, Adam Katz wrote:
> On 05/26/2010 07:32 PM, John Hardin wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 May 2010, Karsten Br�ckelmann wrote:
>>
>>> The correct answer to both these statements is -- because it is in the
>>> mirrors list. ;)
>>>
>>> $ lynx -dump http://yerp.org/rules/MIRRORED.BY
2010/5/6 Karsten Bräckelmann :
> On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 15:39 -0700, Kelson Vibber wrote:
>> We're seeing FPs Twitter's "So-and-so is now following you on Twitter"
>> notices, pushed over by JM_SOUGHT_3's 4 points. It appears to be
>> matching on __SEEK_O1OO80, which contains a large chunk of Twitt
yep -- feel free to send me over copies of FP messages (or strings
that match them)
2010/4/16 Karsten Bräckelmann :
> On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 12:20 +0100, Matthew Newton wrote:
>> We had a legitimate e-mail hit the JM_SOUGHT_3 yesterday. It also
>> hit a few other rules that pushed it over our rejec
he doesn't take FPs into account. this is a very serious problem with
the methodology.
--j.
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 03:41, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Last October Marc posted the following URL that compared the various RBLs:
>
>> http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
>
> It seems barracuda is still
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 16:38, Klaus Heinz wrote:
> Justin Mason wrote:
>> all active mirrors should be updated by now. if anyone runs into this, just
>> save yourself the bother and immediately switch to
>> http://www.apache.org/dist/spamassassin/source/ and download direct
oh, and no -- SA 3.3.1 has not been recalled!
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:20, Justin Mason wrote:
> all active mirrors should be updated by now. if anyone runs into this, just
> save yourself the bother and immediately switch to
> http://www.apache.org/dist/spamassassin/source/ and
all active mirrors should be updated by now. if anyone runs into this, just
save yourself the bother and immediately switch to
http://www.apache.org/dist/spamassassin/source/ and download directly from
the source.
Then, please reply with the URL of the broken mirror and we'll ask infra to
remove
gt;> schrieb Michael Scheidell:
>> > On 3/19/10 12:31 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
>> >> Release Notes -- Apache SpamAssassin -- Version 3.3.1
>> >>
>> >
>> http://www.apache.org/dist/spamassassin/source/Mail-SpamAssassin-3.3.1
>> > .tar.gz.md
Release Notes -- Apache SpamAssassin -- Version 3.3.1
Introduction
This is a minor release, adding a new URIBL network rule (URIBL_DBL_SPAM, for
the
Spamhaus DBL).
Downloading and availability
Downloads are available from:
http://spamassassin.apache
that's CPU-bound, no system calls => regexp matching. body, rawbody
or full rules.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 22:16, Matt Garretson
wrote:
> On 3/18/2010 6:06 PM, Matt Garretson wrote:
>> It looks like a dns call (or two?) for URI-A took 120 seconds to return.
>> Is that a mere coincdence, or could
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 21:56, Matt Garretson
wrote:
> On 3/18/2010 5:15 PM, Kris Deugau wrote:
>> Here's one pretty much guaranteed to peg a CPU core for ~130 seconds (or
>> more):
>>
>> http://pastebin.com/2ssy2YEk
>
>
> Interesting. I see the same thing as you on that message. There's a
> two-m
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 15:07, Daniel Lemke wrote:
> Hmm, any comments on this?
>
> Heise.de just published an article regarding this issue:
> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Sicherheitsluecke-in-SpamAssasin-Filtermodul-956991.html
>
> Kind of interesting to me since I >have to< run sa as r
Agreed, he's clearly unaware of
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6271
Anyone care to craft a response? I think we should. bonus points for
including the obligatory comp.risks tagline:
"The RISK? Jumping to an invalid conclusion based on incomplete research."
;)
--j.
20
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 17:09, wrote:
> On 03/01, Justin Mason wrote:
>> that's the ruleqa.spamassassin.org UI.
>
> Which data is used for the sa-updates? Just the latest random weekly
> network mass-check?
Yep, exactly. (with additional checks to ensure the data is &
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 15:01, wrote:
> On 03/01, Justin Mason wrote:
>> it's based on who's reported their logs -- give it time to complete.
>
> Thanks.
>
>> nope -- preflights have been stopped, as they're quite CPU-intensive and
>> we don'
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 18:13, wrote:
> I believe I checked "916929: 2010-02-27 08:50:01" twice today, and got
> different numbers each time. Is that because it wasn't complete? Is there
> a way to tell if it's complete?
it's based on who's reported their logs -- give it time to complete.
>
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 11:01, Per Jessen wrote:
> Justin Mason wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 03:00, wrote:
>>> http://www.chaosreigns.com/mtx/
>>
>>
>> It might be useful to compare with MTA MARK and see what the status of
>> that proposal cu
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 07:46, mbeis wrote:
>
>
> John Hardin wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010, mbeis wrote:
>>
>>> Feb 14 22:12:46.522 [11706] dbg: dns: query failed:
>>> 0.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org => NOERROR
>>> Feb 14 22:12:46.525 [11706] dbg: dns: query failed:
>>> mirrors.updates.spamassa
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 03:00, wrote:
> http://www.chaosreigns.com/mtx/
It might be useful to compare with MTA MARK and see what the status of
that proposal currently is:
http://tools.ietf.org/draft/draft-stumpf-dns-mtamark/
http://tools.ietf.org/draft/draft-stumpf-dns-mtamark/draft-stumpf-dns
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 15:07, Carlos Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Mike Cardwell
> wrote:
>> The error message, "gpg required but not found," means that gpg was
>> required, but was not found. I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest
>> that maybe gpg wasn't found, but i
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 18:21, Warren Togami wrote:
> On 02/02/2010 12:07 PM, Adam Katz wrote:
>>
>> That is quite different from our masscheck stats. Today's results at
>> http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20100201/%2FJM_SOUGHT look like this:
>>
>> SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME
>>
it's a "release version" -- each release's version of that file and
its sigs will never change.
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:55, Michael Scheidell wrote:
>
>
> On 2/1/10 5:52 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>
> In this case, I would use the sa-update --install option.
In this case, I would use the sa-update --install option.
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 19:56, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> Working on official SA 3.3.0 port for Freebsd, have a Question:
> if user who installs SA 3.3.0 does NOT install or use sa-update, then I have
> to install the default ruleset.
> wh
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 14:59, Mark Martinec wrote:
> On Friday 29 January 2010 04:20:15 René Berber wrote:
>> Jason Bertoch wrote:
>> > What version of re2c are you using? Can you post the output of
>> > 'spamassassin -D --lint' to pastebin?
>>
>> Now using re2c 1.3.5 same problem, to be precise
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 16:43, John Wilcock wrote:
> To state the problem again, 463 of the scores in the 50_scores.cf from 3.3.0
> sa-update refer to rules that used to be in 72_active.cf or 80_additional.cf
> in 3.2.5, but that neither of these two files are anywhere to be found in
> the 3.3.0 s
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 21:31, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Warren Togami wrote on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:32:15 -0500:
>
>> This is a reminder that the 3.3.0 final cut is scheduled for Friday,
>> January 15th.
>
> It seems you forgot to announce RC3, or did I overlook it here?
rc3 was never released -- the
I'm not sure -- I've seen that (generally with UTF-8 locales). I
think it may be missing locale data in the OS install.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 14:53, Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
> SpamAssassin Server version 3.2.5
> running on Perl 5.8.8
> with zlib support (Compress::Zlib 2.011)
> SunOS ornl
yes, good point. I've updated the POD docs now for 3.3.0.
--j.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 09:01, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> In the thread:
> http://osdir.com/ml/debian-bugs-closed/2009-08/msg01318.html
>
> Error code 98 is described as the message being fed being to big and the
> problem resolved
hi -- is this still occurring with latest snapshots? If so, could you
open a ticket at our bugzilla?
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 21:00, David Bayle wrote:
> Hy,
>
> Our setup is:
> - Ubuntu 8.04 ( 2.6.26 )
> - Trying to setup snapshots from
> http://svn.apache.org/snapshots/spamassassin/
> - Tested:
Very unusual. What do you get if you use "wget" or "curl" from the
command line to download those URLs:
[98652] dbg: http: GET request,
http://daryl.dostech.ca/sa-update/asf/895075.tar.gz
[98652] dbg: http: GET request,
http://daryl.dostech.ca/sa-update/asf/895075.tar.gz.sha1
[98652] dbg: http:
Hmm. We can use if can() to work around it...
On Wednesday, January 6, 2010, Mark Martinec wrote:
> jidanni wrote:
>
>> $ sa-update
>> config: failed to parse line, skipping,
>> in "/tmp/.spamassassin5560GP7SGbtmp/10_default_prefs.cf":
>> clear_originating_ip_headers
>> config: failed to parse
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 13:54, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>> > After a bit of digging I found that sa-update had, in fact, updated my
>> > system
>> > before I read this.
>
> On 04.01.10 15:41, Alex wrote:
>> sa-update had also updated my system, and amavisd was restarted.
>> However, the 72_ac
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 13:40, Jason Bertoch wrote:
> Warren Togami wrote:
>>
>> Apache SpamAssassin 3.3.0-rc1 is now available for testing.
>>
>
> I've been running 3.3.0-rc1 for a little over a week with no noticeable
> issues, but I've made an observation that I'd like to note. I have several
>
Damn -- mea culpa. When we fixed the bug in SVN trunk in bug 5852, I
should have immediately backported it to the 3.2.x sa-update channel
when I commited that patch, but I didn't.
It's now fixed in updates, but that won't help the admins who've been
paged to deal with high FP rates on a holiday.
+1 on opening a bug, the sooner that happens the sooner we can get the
fix into the next release ;)
Thanks Henrik, that looks promising (if a little crazy).
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 15:20, Henrik K wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 09:52:50AM -0500, Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
>> I have just recent
hi -- I think this is harmless. but it is definitely ugly. can you
open a bug in the bugzilla for this?
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 18:38, Jens Schleusener
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> to install Mail-SpamAssassin SVN versions (and now Mail-SpamAssassin
> 3.3.0-beta1) I use the command
>
> perl Makefile.PL PR
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 15:31, R-Elists wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Axb
> > PS: If JM posts a link to his Amazon wishlist, maybe we can
> > all help him decorate the new place :-)
> >
> >
> >
>
> +1
>
hey, if you all insist ;)
http://www.amazon.com/registry/wishlist/1M0UDEXT6A3I7
https://www.amazon
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 19:04, Jason Bertoch wrote:
> John Hardin wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Jason Bertoch wrote:
>>
>> Charles Gregory wrote:
>>>
If a spammer gets an IP blacklisted, at the least DNSWL and HABEAS
should make note of this and remove the IP
>>>
>>>
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 16:15, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On ons 16 dec 2009 16:49:52 CET, Charles Gregory wrote
>
>> Marc Perkel wrote:
>>>
http://www.vintage-computer.com/asr33.shtml
>>> There was actually a time when I had one of those in my house.
>>>
>>
>> For your amusement:
>>
>> I
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 13:59, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> It was a good catch that RNBL replaced SSBL but I don't see this as a 3.3.0
> P1 issue. Same thing with HABEAS/BSP. Can't these be handled in normal
> course with GA and then sa-update? I worry we are hurrying these too much.
>
>
> This
btw might be worth getting this into a bug.
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 02:30, Mark Martinec
> wrote:
> > Thanks for testing! Which version of a perl module Time::HiRes
> > do you have installed? See what is reported by:
> > $ perl -MTime::HiRes -le 'print Time::HiRes->VERSION'
> > Could you please
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 14:04, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 06:55 -0700, LuKreme wrote:
> > On 3-Dec-2009, at 23:06, R-Elists wrote:
> > > certainly we understand your point here, yet what about accountability
> for
> > > Return Path Inc (and other RPI companies) related r
Hi all -
I'm afraid the sought rules, and generally most of my time to work on
SA, is still on a bit of a hiatus due to circumstances out of my
control :(
unfortunately my house renovation is taking longer than planned, and
my net access outside work, at the moment, consists of an iPhone!
Workin
that's normal. can be ignored
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 21:04, Yet Another Ninja wrote:
> When running masscheck calling:
>
> /home/mc/masscheck/spamassassin/trunk/masses && nice ./mass-check \
> --cf='loadplugin Dumptext plugins/Dumptext.pm' \
> --cf='loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Che
If they are from sa, that's not good; in our case rules == source.
On Thursday, November 19, 2009, Adam Katz wrote:
> http://cebka.pp.ru/trac/wiki/RspamdFeatures contains:
>> Rspamd is anti-spam system that is designed to work faster than
>> spamassassin by using event model and regular expressio
can't type much as i've broken my elbow (oh noes!) -- but we talked in
the past about using an LR engine for rescoring. not sure if that got
anywhere though.
btw be aware also that there was a perceptron rescorer, but it
produced more fragile scores than the ga; see 3.2.0 rescoring ticket
for his
First -- my name is not Jim. Secondly -- I don't care what Spamhaus
does, I'm asking what you suggest SpamAssassin do to measure FPs.
--j.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 06:00, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk
wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 20:34 +, Justin Mason wrote:
>> On Sun, No
> SPAM% HAM% RANK RULE
> 12.8342% 0.0021% 0.94 RCVD_IN_PSBL *
> 12.3053% 0.0026% 0.94 RCVD_IN_XBL
> 31.2499% 0.0827% 0.87 RCVD_IN_ANBREP_BL *2
> 80.2578% 0.1485% 0.86 RCVD_IN_PBL
> 27.1836% 0.1985% 0.79 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL
> 19.8213% 0.1785% 0.79 RCVD_IN_SEMBLACK *
> 90.9360% 0.3854% 0.77 RCVD_
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 08:53, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk
wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 03:14 -0500, Warren Togami wrote:
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200910.mbox/%3c4ad11c44.9030...@redhat.com%3e
>> Compare this report to a similar report last month.
>>
>> http://wi
Hi guys --
the problem is that SOUGHT uses gigabytes of private mail, so running
that on a shared host is not viable. Currently we don't have anything
like that I can use :(
On Wednesday, November 11, 2009, George R. Kasica wrote:
>>On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:09:09 -0500, you wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>> Y
expected behavior...
>
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009, Justin Mason wrote:
>> Right now, SOUGHT appears to be broken. I need to get to where the
> server is currently and fix it -- I don't have remote login to it at the
> mo :(
>
> And that's about all we know at the moment.
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 00:00, John Hardin wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009, Justin Mason wrote:
>
>> I need the "full" mails to do that -- but with the uploaded mail, yes, I
>> should do that! good point.
>
> Glad to help.
>
>> Right now, SOUGHT appears to be
I need the "full" mails to do that -- but with the uploaded mail, yes,
I should do that!
good point.
Right now, SOUGHT appears to be broken. I need to get to where the server is
currently and fix it -- I don't have remote login to it at the mo :(
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 18:02, John Hardin wrote:
(back from vacation ;)
BTW, could you add
tflags nopublish
to any rules? or use a T_ prefix on the rule names. that will ensure
the testing rules won't get into any published ruleset
accidentally. this is very important to avoid accidentally causing a
production-level DOS on the BL's server
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 16:15, John Hardin wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Zdenek Herman wrote:
>
>> I have same problem.
>> Any solution ?
>>
>> to...@starbridge.org napsal(a):
>>
>>> i'm running SA 3.3.0 (3.3.0-alpha3-r808953) and i've some problem with
>>> compiled rules.
>>>
>>> sa-compile runs wi
up:
Today we talk with Justin Mason, the original author of SpamAssassin,
a world class anti-SPAM tool that's fundamentally changed the way we
deal with the SPAM problem.
These short overviews will give you a good grounding in the basics of
the tool, the alternatives and also perhaps enlighte
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 04:01, Warren Togami wrote:
> On 09/16/2009 11:25 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>> excellent. That's 2 people who could do with an extension, then!
>
> Could we state with clarity the new deadline? I might have other people
> with data depen
excellent. That's 2 people who could do with an extension, then!
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 20:16, Daryl C. W. O'Shea
wrote:
> On 16/09/2009 4:03 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
>> Who is running a mass-check that's still in progress? (fwiw, I am ;)
>
> I had a NAS failure
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 15:47, Warren Togami wrote:
> On 09/04/2009 10:51 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>> OK, if you're planning to send us mass-check logs for the
>> 3.3.0 rescoring, now's the time!
>>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/Resco
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 22:59, mouss wrote:
> Justin Mason a écrit :
>> In fairness, they got in touch to ask for help in setting up a more
>> recent SA, but none of us (ie the PMC) had the spare cycles to help
>> out. Comparative third-party tests like this always take a l
OK, if you're planning to send us mass-check logs for the
3.3.0 rescoring, now's the time!
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RescoreDetails has all the details.
cheers!
--j.
In fairness, they got in touch to ask for help in setting up a more
recent SA, but none of us (ie the PMC) had the spare cycles to help
out. Comparative third-party tests like this always take a lot of
hand-holding. We don't have the same kind of marketing budget as the
commercial companies, need
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:18, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On Thu 03 Sep 2009 07:19:35 AM CEST, Clunk Werclick wrote
>
>> Forgive the stupidity of the question, but I'm not sure how to, or even
>> if it can be implemented?
>
> forgive me, why do you want all that crap into your spamassassin when
> postf
Please watch your language. This is a public mailing list, and
offensive language here is inappropriate.
--j.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 03:41, Res wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>>
>> On 09.08.09 09:20, Res wrote:
>>>
>>> Correct, only relay for your own customers base
Apache SpamAssassin 3.3.0-alpha2 is now available for testing.
Downloads are available from:
http://people.apache.org/~jm/devel/
md5sum of archive files:
1b396a9df1faa22185263c7526fe6042 Mail-SpamAssassin-3.3.0-alpha2.tar.bz2
fbd0c4016d5d9c5adc3a958105b0b414 Mail-SpamAssassin-3.3.0-alpha2.tar
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 10:04, Henrik K wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 12:04:08AM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
>> Well -- it's not just the cores -- what was the usage of the cores that
>> were being used? were 3 out the 8 'pegged'? Are these 'real' cores, or
>> HT cores? In the Core2 and P4 arc
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 09:32,
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> Imagine what Barracuda Networks could do with that if they did not fill
> their gay little boxes with hardware rubbish from the floors of MSI and
> supermicro. Jesus, try and process that many messages with a $30,000
> Barracuda and wat
hi -- turn off Bayes and AWL.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 07:55, poifgh wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I was measuring how quickly could SA [spam assassin] process spams when
> several SA processes are run in parallel over separate mbox files. I used a
> 8 core machine. Below are the numbers when I forked differen
sounds like a bug in sa-compile; it would probably mean one of the
SOUGHT rules will not fire on its input. minor issue, but annoying.
could you run "sa-compile --debug --keep-tmps", find the output dir,
and post the stdout/stderr output and the /tmp dir to a bug on the
bugzilla? thanks!
--j.
O
looks interesting! I've asked the developer if he's interested in us
testing it out
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 10:34, Brent Clark wrote:
> Hiya
>
> Do any of you guys use the following list.
>
> http://malware.hiperlinks.com.br/cgi/submit?action=list_sa
>
> If so, may I ask how do you find the r
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 14:41, Aaron Bennett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're noticing that much of the spam which makes it through our filter hits
> the spamhaus pbl rule. However, that rule by itself scores only 0.9. Since
> we quarantine spam through a web interface (maia), we're pretty tolerant of
> fa
> If my system detect any HABEAS stuff, I score it with 10.00 and the spam
> is gone. I have moved a very long time (arround 2 years) the messages
> to a seperated folder and had not a singel False-Positive.
>
obviously you weren't reading this mailing list several years ago,
when several of t
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 09:45, Michelle
Konzack wrote:
> Am 2009-07-17 09:46:28, schrieb Ben:
>> Dan,
>>
>> Thanks for the rules.
>>
>> I am using "AE_MED42" from a previous thread, is this "AE_MED44" meant
>> to replace this or work in addition to it?
>>
>> Also just curious, why the low score? W
Hi Damian --
Our first impression: somebody other than us is suing somebody other
than us about a matter that may be entirely unrelated to anything we
produce. Unless we have a specific reason to believe that a specific
patent is likely to be enforced against either us or a downstream user
(and,
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 14:38, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> 'them'?
>
> men in black?
>
> freebsd? or CPAN maintainer of Term:ReadKey?
Up to you. ;) I'd recommend the latter.
--j.
> ps, out of office messages, read receipt and FPS on vabounce. OOO messages,
> and RR messages cannot be whiteliste
the progress indicators use Term::ReadKey, which (looking at its
source) appears to call "resize" under certain circumstances. you
should probably file a bug with them
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 14:28, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> wondering..
>
> am I missing something? 'resize: not found'
>
> go
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 22:04, Spiro Harvey wrote:
> Did you know...?
>
> Emails like yours are what we're trying to block on a daily basis.
This is distinctly unhelpful. Please be courteous when dealing with
public mailing list inquiries, especially when you have no relation to
the Apache SpamAs
sorry about the double-post -- original message was stuck in moderation queue.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 18:20,
sebast...@debianfan.de wrote:
> Hello,
>
> i have set up a virtual server for experiments.
>
> I want to disable all the spamassassin tests - except one specific rbl - in
> this topic- th
that old message I was talking about.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Daniel Quinlan
Date: Sat, May 22, 2004 at 16:25
Subject: DNSBL accuracy using -firsttrusted
To: spamassassin-...@incubator.apache.org
Someone at Spamhaus poked me to try testing only the last IP address
with XB
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 22:43, RW wrote:
>
> I think it might be worth having 2 XBL tests, a high scoring test on
> last-external and a lower-scoring test that goes back through the
> untrusted headers.
>
> I understand that Spamhaus doesn't recommend this, because dynamic IP
> addresses can be reas
could it be using a different perl binary?
On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 03:26, LuKreme wrote:
> When trying to build SA3.3 I got the following error:
>
> ERROR: the required NetAddr::IP module is not installed. at
> lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Util/DependencyInfo.pm line 285.
>
> Trouble is, I have p5-NetAddr
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 10:14,
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 10:06 +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
>> I've heard that they are diligent about terminating abusive clients.
>> Are you reporting these spams to them?
>>
> Yes - but you would thing a lo
SpentLeft Speed
100 2437 100 24370 0 10301 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 1291k
gpg: key 6C6191E3: public key "Justin Mason Signing Key (Code Signing
Only) " imported
gpg: Total number processed: 1
gpg: imported: 1
: 35...; gpg --verify 320790737.tar.gz
yep, seeing that here too. Investigating...
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 08:42, Brent Clark wrote:
> Hiya
>
> Im having a little problem with updating.
>
> [13860] dbg: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::MIMEHeader=HASH(0x9ccb9c0)
> implements 'finish_tests', priority 0
> [13860] dbg: plugin: Mail::Sp
I've heard that they are diligent about terminating abusive clients.
Are you reporting these spams to them?
--j.
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 09:55, Mike
Cardwell wrote:
> rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
>
>> I'm probably missing something here - but Constant Contact (who we block
>> by IP) have been a n
Apache SpamAssassin 3.3.0-alpha1 is now available for testing.
Downloads are available from:
http://people.apache.org/~jm/devel/
md5sum of archive files:
04141392e1f20ea4a91bb63937351c65 Mail-SpamAssassin-3.3.0-alpha1.tar.bz2
1532b02384c37b4fb40ff1244bca3ec5 Mail-SpamAssassin-3.3.0-alpha1.t
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 15:28, Sean Cardus wrote:
>> > An re2c bug, presumably? Is anyone having problems without using sa-
>> > compile?
>>
>> If I removed the compiled rule sets, everything works fine again...
>
> I've noticed that sa-update pulled in a new set of Sought rules this morning
> (ver
hey Matt -- what version of re2c is installed?
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 18:43, Matt Elson wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I stumbled upon an odd issue the other day that I'm having trouble
> tracking down. Namely, a certain rule in the sought rule set, when
> compiled for use with Rule2XSBody is causing the
[forwarded from bugzilla]
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6139
--- Comment #6 from Justin Mason 2009-06-29 15:00:53 PST ---
actually, it's worse than that. Every SVN checkout needs the following, it
seems:
svn propdel svn:externals . ; rm -rf rulesrc ; svn up
1 - 100 of 1348 matches
Mail list logo
