James Butler wrote:
We've fielded many, many inquiries about the availability of Arabic
domain names over the past several years. Don't underestimate the
backlash against everything being in English for so long ... there are
hordes (sorry) of folks who want to be able to use their native
characte
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
While SNF stuff looks interesting to me, it seems also to me that it is
meant as a SA replacement.
In some cases SNF is used as a replacement - in others it is not. Why
shouldn't a plugin be as powerful as possible? Doesn't that ultimately
make the platform bette
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
We have significantly upgraded our plugin for SpamAssassin.
looks to me like collaborative system containg functionalities like those in
SA already (dcc,razor.pyzor,blacklists) and bayes
Well, I suppose all collaborative systems look alike on some l
Justin Mason wrote:
thanks Pete! looks nifty. Is that linked on the SA wiki?
Yes :-)
_M
Hello SA folks,
We have significantly upgraded our plugin for SpamAssassin.
You can find it here:
http://www.armresearch.com/products/index.jsp
Or more specifically here:
http://www.armresearch.com/message-sniffer/download/snf4sa-0.9.2.tar.gz
Please take a look and let us know what you think
Should I re-run sa-compile after a rules update by sa-update?
--
Pete Hanson
http://www.well.com/user/wolfy
http://www.fotolog.net/wolfy
His question may have been pretty basic, born of laziness. But when you
respond with "man sa-update" or RTFM, then you end up with a mailing
list archive full of useless info, lowering its value as a useful resource.
Ignore or respond with something useful. (In my opinion)
Duane Hill wrote:
O
adam lanier wrote:
On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 00:37 +1000, Pete Russell wrote:
How do i write a rule that says;
if mail is recieved from parent company email gateway/s AND the from
address is not from the parent company domain THEN give XX score.
Something like?
header __GATEWAY_RELAY
score.
Appreciate any help/tips/suggestions
Many thanks
Pete
You have described why it wont work as good. Using your method the
headers become useless - bayes ill learn only the body/subject content.
You would need to tell bayes to ignore the headers.
With pop3 you only have the option you describe - this may still work ok?
Pete
Oenus Tech Services
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 03:44:26PM +, Pete typed :
> Hello all,
>
> If I can just say first of all that I have SpamAssassin working on my system
> and I'm very happy with it. However, I am curious as to why I can't get
> every optional module installed as well. I pro
issue
and nothing to do with SpamAssassin. Which, embarrassingly, I'm thinking it
is ... :/ Oh well, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Thanks for your time all.
Regards,
Pete.
Matt,
your email in fact pointed out a bit of sloopiness on my part in the
logging. I have changed
it so it now should show correctly which messages actually trigger a
call to spamc without
me having to look at the verbose log listings.
Thanks again,
Pete
HERE IS THE NEW rc.spam
# send
Matt,
Thanks for the prompt reply. Indeed you ask a very good question.
No the size of the message seems to not matter. When I turn on the
expanded logging I can see that the message is in fact "assigned" to the
spamc process.
Other ideas?
Pete
Matt Kettler wrote:
Ques
I have been running spamassassin for many years with great success.
Recently though I noticed more spam getting through so I updated to
SA 3.1 on my Redhat 9 system. I also added some additional cf's for SA
using ruledujour in hopes of catching more spam. Now however, lots of
messages never seem
block these types of mail.
http://www.rulesemporium.com/forums/showthread.php?s=0999129f1c5d4b74fd288d9ac9ed7997&threadid=145&goto=nextnewest
Look at the entry
*"Using Clamav instead*posted: 05-27-2005 03:22 PM by:* j_dxn". *
Wouldn't this also be resource friendly?
Pete
Hi,
I ran a diff on the scores between 3.0.3 and 3.0.4 and it looks like
RCVD_IN_SORBS_MISC, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SOCKS and RCVD_IN_SORBS_SMTP scores
played some musical chairs or am I not seeing this correctly?
Pete
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> diff -u Mail-SpamAssassin-3.0.3/rules/50_scores.cf
M
.cf, in /etc/mail/spamassassin :
rewrite_header Subject [SPAM]
required_hits 4.8
# report_safe 1
# trusted_networks 212.17.35.
lock_method flock
# These addresses should never be marked as [SPAM].
whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The 'lock_method flock' was initially commented out. I enabled it to
experiment, as I don't use NFS.
Sorry for the long post.
Pete.
Hi Jim,
Thanks for the reply, guess I missed that. I do have 2 questions though.
1. Any idea why the rulesemporium rules page isn't very clear and still
has info on how to use it with RDJ?
2. Any idea how do I go about changing RDJ and bigevil.cf over to use
ws.surbl.org?
f.
I checked rulesemporium, and sure enough the file can't be found. Anyone
know what's up?
Thx
Pete
--
"Unencumbered by the thought process"
--1992-2000 Click and Clack presidential campaign slogan
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> :0:
> * ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*
> HERE I'D LIKE TO DELETE THE MESSAGE THAT HAVE THAT MUCH TAGS HOW IS IT
POSSIBLE
You could send it to /dev/null using something like:
{
:0
/dev/null
}
Pete
On Friday, September 10, 2004, 1:13:38 PM, Jeff wrote:
JC> Thanks for your comments. By "recursive domain additions" to you
JC> mean to initiate a proactive search of domains within a given
JC> network? What I'm proposing is not to actively try to search,
JC> but simply to bias the inclusion of
On Friday, September 10, 2004, 10:43:39 AM, Jeff wrote:
>> Holy confusion! I can't tell where you are on this subject now Jeff :)
JC> If you're talking about adding resolved IP addresses to SURBLs,
JC> no we're not going to do that. :-(
JC> What I'm talking about is an internal process whe
I can only tell you that you are on the
right track and that you will want to watch the rates at which things
are added and the FP rates and character - then tweak the rules you
use to keep this process clean. When I started using this approach I
thought I had an idea what would work - and I was more wrong than
right until about the 3rd round of adjustments.
My $0.02
_M
Pete McNeil (Madscientist)
President, MicroNeil Research Corporation
Chief SortMonster (www.sortmonster.com)
24 matches
Mail list logo
