Re: Using SpamAssassin to filter port 110

2007-08-21 Thread Tim A
Just need to proxy POP3 through SpamAssassin. There are a number of ways to do that and some commercial products/services out there. On 8/20/07, Patman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello, > > New to the forum. > > > Question, what I would like to do, is filter incoming traffic on port 110, > w

RE: SpamAssassin w/POP3 & SMTP outsourced e-mail server...

2005-07-13 Thread Tim A
Jesse, You might want to look into SimpleFilter (www.simplefilter.com). There is a free trial and the service is cheap. Tim > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Jesse Shumaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Jul 5, 2005 2:59 AM > Subject: SpamAssassin w/POP3 & SMTP outsourced e-mail s

RE: Bayes lock failed

2004-12-16 Thread Tim A
> -Original Message- > From: Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 20:53:14 -0500 > Subject: Re: Bayes lock failed > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], users@spamassassin.apache.org > > > At 08:02 PM 12/6/2004, Tim A wrote: > >I've read a

RE: Mail::audit & mail::spamassassin is SLOW - not using spamd ?

2004-12-14 Thread Tim A
Bump ... anyone have any response to this?? > -Original Message- > From: Tim A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:34:28 -0500 > Subject: RE: Mail::audit & mail::spamassassin is SLOW - not using spamd ? > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org >

Bayes lock failed

2004-12-07 Thread Tim A
I've read a number of people having problems with an error similar to what I'm getting with SA v3.0.1: Cannot open bayes databases /root/.spamassassin/bayes_* R/W: lock failed: File exists This only happens occassionally and not every time under the exact same invocation of SA. So obviously it

RE: Mail::audit & mail::spamassassin is SLOW - not using spamd ?

2004-11-29 Thread Tim A
> -Original Message- > From: Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:35:12 -0500 > Subject: Re: Mail::audit & mail::spamassassin is SLOW - not using spamd ? > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org > > > On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 11:27:31AM +1100, Andrew Nelson wrote: > >