PS. Will setting up SPF on my domain name have any effect for things
like this? Will it discourage spammers from using my domain or reduce
the number of bounce messages I/we get?
Nick...
Nick Gilbert wrote:
Justin Mason wrote:
existing set: http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/VBounceRuleset
To =~ /[EMAIL PROTECTED]/i
meta NICK_SPOOF_BOUNCE (( __NICK_IS_A_BOUNCE && __NICK_TO_NOT_ME) &&
(!__NICK_BOUNCE_REAL))
score NICK_SPOOF_BOUNCE 10
describe NICK_SPOOF_BOUNCE "Attached bounce contains my address but I
never sent this!"
--
Nick Gi
Hi,
I've been trying to write some SA rules to reject bounce messages which
I did not send.
I've made a good start, but some bounce messages still get through but I
don't understand why.
The theory is that viruses and spammers don't seem to use my full e-mail
address [EMAIL PROTECTED] but
Hi,
I have a problem whereby spamc sometimes times out while scanning mail
and consequently spam e-mail passes through unchecked straight to my inbox.
It is being called from Simscan but I don't think this is the problem as
the same thing happens on the command line.
If I run spamc manually
Hi,
I have a problem whereby spamassassin isn't always processing messages.
It is being called by SimScan.
I can see from the headers that SimScan IS being called but it doesn't
ALWAYS seem to be able to process the messages with SpamAssassin -
resulting in 300+ SPAM messages a day going int
Right. I restarted the box (just in case) and it's now behaving slightly
differently for some reason (no idea why - I've already restarted the
spamd service several times this evening):
spamc -u nick < spam3.txt now gives:
* 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100%
...whi
What parameters is spamd
started with? In particular, is spamd started with -u? If so, spamc's -u will be
ignored.
I was - yes. But removing it and restarting spamd, and then rerunning
the test doesn't seem to make any difference. It still isn't applying
the bayes scores to that message even w
So perhaps the source of the problem is not simscan after all? Why
would spamassassin and spamc produce different results?
I never said the problem was with SimScan.
No *I* did :)
Matt Kettler asked the relevant question. Are you logged in as Nick
when you are testing spamassassin?
Yep
Are you running spamassassin while logged in as "nick"?
Yes... But I presumed that the "-u nick" was designed to simulate that?
Well that works with spamc, but not for spamassassin. ie:
if you did that all while logged in as root, spamc would be using nick's bayes
DB, but spamassassin woul
Matt Kettler wrote:
Nick Gilbert wrote:
I've just noticed that if I run:
spamc -u [EMAIL PROTECTED] < spam3.txt
or
spamc -u nick < spam3.txt
I do NOT get the bayes results which I DO get if I run:
spamassassin -t < spam3.txt.
So perhaps the source of the problem is not sim
I've just noticed that if I run:
spamc -u [EMAIL PROTECTED] < spam3.txt
or
spamc -u nick < spam3.txt
I do NOT get the bayes results which I DO get if I run:
spamassassin -t < spam3.txt.
So perhaps the source of the problem is not simscan after all? Why would
spamassassin and spamc produce d
Hi,
For some reason, spamassassin is behaving differently when it scans real
incoming mail compared to when I run it manually with the -t option from
the console.
When a real message is scanned, it doesn't seem to apply any bayesian
scoring to the message (even though it's all trained up with tho
Why does a Razor2 check have such a low default score (0.1)? Surely if a
message is in Razor2 then it's definitely a spam with almost no risk of
a false positive? Is it safe to increase this value to something higher?
Thanks,
Nick...
Hi,
Recently a lot of messages have started getting past spamassassin as
ham. They are all the same format and disguise the words by using
floating divs:
CPLUCMXVAV
erelIeaAmI
Is there a ruleset that would catch e-mails of this type? Ie a test for
lots of divs that have been floated left and
> Get permission to redirect e-mail from a client's former employees where
> that employee's address receives a ton of spam.
Also, I've just checked a former employee's account who hasn't worked
here for a year or soa lot of the mail sitting in their mailbox isn't SPAM.
It also included:
-Mail
> Get permission to redirect e-mail from a client's former employees where
> that employee's address receives a ton of spam.
This will NOT work.
Receiving a spam after it has been forwarded is NOT the same as
receiving the SPAM directly from the spammer. All the headers will be
replaced with leg
>> Surely they should both give exactly the same result?
>
> Maybe.. Depends a LOT on the options you pass to spamd when you start it.
Yes you're right - there's an error in the scripts on Bill Shupps
shupp.org site which I used to make my box - it was calling spamd with
-L for some reason. I exp
Hi,
Why do I get (VERY) different results on the same machine if I call
spamassassin in two different ways? Eg:
spamassassin -D < spam.txt
Gives:
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=10.8 required=5.0
tests=AWL,HELO_DYNAMIC_COMCAST,INFO_TLD,RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100,RAZOR2_CHECK,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,
18 matches
Mail list logo
