Re: SpamAssassin not launched

2006-12-22 Thread karlp
On Thu, December 21, 2006 11:20 pm, menashe wrote: > > Until recently, I had the spamassassin launched for every email received via > a VB program that did a CreateProcess to which I passed the a command like > spamassassin.bat < infile > outfile. > Since several days, the CreateProcess is execute

Re: Systemwide Procmail usage

2006-12-01 Thread karlp
On Fri, December 1, 2006 8:06 am, Bob McClure Jr wrote: > On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 05:56:06AM -0500, Will Nordmeyer wrote: >> I know this isn't the procmail list, but had a quick question. >> >> >> >> My server is running SA 3.1.7 and has the following systemwide procmailrc: >> >> >> >> SHELL=/bin/

Re: procmail and virtual domain

2006-11-17 Thread karlp
On Fri, November 17, 2006 10:08 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi list > I have postfix with a virtual domain, where I have to create a .procmailrc > file for procmail? ( I have to create a file or a directory? ) > How to configure a system wide? > Thanks > I recommend searching on the internet f

Re: Question about SpamAssassin

2006-06-13 Thread karlp
On Tue, June 13, 2006 10:21 am, slyandjen said: > > Does SpamAssassin have it's own whitelist / blacklist Of course. > > if yes where is it located? /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf or /home/$USER/.spamassassin/user_prefs > > when is the configuration file to enable this feature? Anything you

Re: When Reply = To

2006-02-01 Thread karlp
On Sun, January 29, 2006 9:09 pm, jdow said: > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> On Sun, January 29, 2006 4:42 pm, jdow said: > ... >>> Do you see ALL_TRUSTED in all or most of the email received? If so your >>> trust path is toast and many of the header consistency checks won't >>> work >>> right.

Re: When Reply = To

2006-01-29 Thread karlp
On Sun, January 29, 2006 4:42 pm, jdow said: > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> On Sun, January 29, 2006 12:50 am, jdow said: >>> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> In my setup (SA 3.1.0) I've done some tweaking here and there, but I'm not expert enough, nor smart enough to understand the

Re: When Reply = To

2006-01-29 Thread karlp
On Sun, January 29, 2006 12:50 am, jdow said: > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> In my setup (SA 3.1.0) I've done some tweaking here and there, but I'm >> not >> expert enough, nor smart enough to understand the cryptic nature of PHP >> (cryptic to me, at least) and the SA rules. >> >> When an email

When Reply = To

2006-01-28 Thread karlp
In my setup (SA 3.1.0) I've done some tweaking here and there, but I'm not expert enough, nor smart enough to understand the cryptic nature of PHP (cryptic to me, at least) and the SA rules. When an email is spoofed as being from me and to me, the score is -100 (+- the other rules caught) as being

RE: whitelist file

2005-12-19 Thread karlp
On Mon, December 19, 2005 12:30 pm, Jean-Paul Natola said: > That was my thought, as all my users are windows users--- > > I guess the question would be phrased as, "can someone guide me , or point me in the direction of building a script/utility that would grab the file from a network locatio

Apparently Recieved by my server...

2005-11-10 Thread karlp
The following email to me gets through by their spoofing my IP even though it clearly comes from somewhere else. I remember someone mentioning a trusted_networks-like setting that used something like a apparently_received_from name or something similar. How do I set it up? Just a pointer to a DOC w

tests=none solved?

2005-11-09 Thread karlp
Hopefully my 'fix' is valid and can be used by others who have posted this problem and feel they haven't received enough, or correct, help. After just learning more about SA, (V3.1.0 on 2 servers), I decided to make a couple changes. The first was to increase the number of daemons kicked off at se

Re: SA 3.1 X-headers prepended instead of appended

2005-10-20 Thread karlp
On Thu, October 20, 2005 10:35 am, Justin Mason said: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> On Thu, October 20, 2005 8:52 am, said: >> > I finally took the leap to SA 3.1 but am confused as to why the SA >> > X-Headers are prepended to the message and not >> > appeneded like the previous versions.

Re: SA 3.1 X-headers prepended instead of appended

2005-10-20 Thread karlp
On Thu, October 20, 2005 8:52 am, said: > All, > > I finally took the leap to SA 3.1 but am confused as to why the SA > X-Headers are prepended to the message and not > appeneded like the previous versions. This is causing havoc on my > Blackberry. Is this normal? I believe this is causing