> -Original Message-
> From: jdow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 7:33 PM
> Gary Funck wrote:
> > Has anyone considered also supplying new rules in the
> > form of rpm's available via a yum-compatible repository?
> > It'd be nice to have the usual versioning an
From: "Bret Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Nor does it make sense to use a tool, even if supplied
with SpamAssassin,
>>> that is broken for performing updates.
>
>> what's the "broken" part?
>
> Well, this may not qualify as broken, but I would say it's an
> undesirable behavior that, upon
> >>> Nor does it make sense to use a tool, even if supplied
> with SpamAssassin,
> >>> that is broken for performing updates.
> >
> >> what's the "broken" part?
> >
> > Well, this may not qualify as broken, but I would say it's an
> > undesirable behavior that, upon successful download of the new
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> --On Wednesday, August 09, 2006 7:33 PM -0700 jdow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > For about a femto-second, perhaps. There is too much YMMV
> > involved with the SARE rule sets to make it practical as
> > an rpm solution.
>
> True, this is the re
--On Wednesday, August 09, 2006 7:33 PM -0700 jdow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
For about a femto-second, perhaps. There is too much YMMV
involved with the SARE rule sets to make it practical as
an rpm solution.
True, this is the real problem with packaging SARE: There's no clear
separation of
--On Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:54 PM -0500 Logan Shaw
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is purely a philosophical argument, but something seems
wrong about the idea of using a package manager to manage
volatile data files in /var.
The problem is not the use of the package manager but the pla
From: "Justin Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
jdow writes:
From: "Jim Maul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Bowie Bailey wrote:
>
>> It doesn't really matter to me who supports which pieces as long as
>> they all work.
>>
>> Someone may be able to fix sa-update so that it can take over from
>> RDJ, but a
From: "Logan Shaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
jdow writes:
Nor does it make sense to use a tool, even if supplied with SpamAssassin,
that is broken for performing updates.
what's the "broken" part?
Well, this may not qualify as broken, but I would say i
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 11:56:00AM -0400, DAve wrote:
I think a status report would be a good option as well. SA already asks
you for your admins email address at install time. Sending a report of
what happened during the sa-update process would be very, very valuable.
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 11:56:00AM -0400, DAve wrote:
> I think a status report would be a good option as well. SA already asks
> you for your admins email address at install time. Sending a report of
> what happened during the sa-update process would be very, very valuable.
Hrm. I'd say feel f
Bret Miller wrote:
Bret Miller writes:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
jdow writes:
Nor does it make sense to use a tool, even if supplied
with SpamAssassin,
that is broken for performing updates.
what's the "broken" part?
Well, this may not qualify as broken, but I would say it's
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 10:14:46AM -0500, Logan Shaw wrote:
> What happens if the new set is broken? There's no easy way
> to revert to the last known good state.
sa-update lint checks the new files in a separate temp area before
installing them into the real directory. Only if lint succeeds
(wh
> Bret Miller writes:
> > > On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
> > > > jdow writes:
> > >
> > > >> Nor does it make sense to use a tool, even if supplied
> > > with SpamAssassin,
> > > >> that is broken for performing updates.
> > >
> > > > what's the "broken" part?
> > >
> > > Well, this may
Bret Miller writes:
> > On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
> > > jdow writes:
> >
> > >> Nor does it make sense to use a tool, even if supplied
> > with SpamAssassin,
> > >> that is broken for performing updates.
> >
> > > what's the "broken" part?
> >
> > Well, this may not qualify as broke
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
> > jdow writes:
>
> >> Nor does it make sense to use a tool, even if supplied
> with SpamAssassin,
> >> that is broken for performing updates.
>
> > what's the "broken" part?
>
> Well, this may not qualify as broken, but I would say it's an
> undesirable
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
jdow writes:
Nor does it make sense to use a tool, even if supplied with SpamAssassin,
that is broken for performing updates.
what's the "broken" part?
Well, this may not qualify as broken, but I would say it's an
undesirable behavior that, upon su
jdow writes:
> From: "Jim Maul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Bowie Bailey wrote:
> >
> >> It doesn't really matter to me who supports which pieces as long as
> >> they all work.
> >>
> >> Someone may be able to fix sa-update so that it can take over from
> >> RDJ, but as of now, that is not possib
On 8/11/2006 12:02 AM, jdow wrote:
From: "Jim Maul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bowie Bailey wrote:
It doesn't really matter to me who supports which pieces as long as
they all work.
Someone may be able to fix sa-update so that it can take over from
RDJ, but as of now, that is not possible without c
From: "Jim Maul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bowie Bailey wrote:
It doesn't really matter to me who supports which pieces as long as
they all work.
Someone may be able to fix sa-update so that it can take over from
RDJ, but as of now, that is not possible without configuring about 62
sa-update channe
Perhaps it could be as simple as only updating existing rules for your
installation? In other words, you would have to download the CF file and
install it first (but you would do this anyways to test!!!). Then sa-update
could simply parse your rules directory and update rules found there
accordin
Bowie Bailey wrote:
Michael Scheidell wrote:
From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Possibly. It depends on the overhead involved in setting up the
channels.
Plus, not all of us want ALL 62 files!
Some of the *[0-3] files say to use 70_abcd0.cf , or _1, or_2, or_3.
Would need tome cf
Michael Scheidell wrote:
> From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Possibly. It depends on the overhead involved in setting up the
channels.
>
> Plus, not all of us want ALL 62 files!
>
> Some of the *[0-3] files say to use 70_abcd0.cf , or _1, or_2, or_3.
>
> Would need tome cf f
> -Original Message-
> From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 2:45 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Image spam with inline jpeg image
>
>
Possibly. It depends on the overhead involved in setting up
>
Jim Maul wrote:
> Bowie Bailey wrote:
>
> > It doesn't really matter to me who supports which pieces as long as
> > they all work.
> >
> > Someone may be able to fix sa-update so that it can take over from
> > RDJ, but as of now, that is not possible without configuring about
> > 62 sa-update ch
Bowie Bailey wrote:
It doesn't really matter to me who supports which pieces as long as
they all work.
Someone may be able to fix sa-update so that it can take over from
RDJ, but as of now, that is not possible without configuring about 62
sa-update channels (one for each ruleset RDJ manages).
Jim Maul wrote:
> Bowie Bailey wrote:
> > Bret Miller wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Gary Funck wrote:
> > > > > > Has anyone considered also supplying new rules in the
> > > > > > form of rpm's available via a yum-compatible repository?
> > > > > > It'd be nice to have the usual versioning a
Bowie Bailey wrote:
Bret Miller wrote:
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Gary Funck wrote:
Has anyone considered also supplying new rules in the
form of rpm's available via a yum-compatible repository?
It'd be nice to have the usual versioning and logging
support as well as a central update facility. This
c
Bret Miller wrote:
> > > On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Gary Funck wrote:
> > > > Has anyone considered also supplying new rules in the
> > > > form of rpm's available via a yum-compatible repository?
> > > > It'd be nice to have the usual versioning and logging
> > > > support as well as a central update fac
> > On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Gary Funck wrote:
> > > Has anyone considered also supplying new rules in the
> > > form of rpm's available via a yum-compatible repository?
> > > It'd be nice to have the usual versioning and logging
> > > support as well as a central update facility. This
> > > could be d
On Wed, August 9, 2006 22:01, Gary Funck wrote:
> could be done as a gateway to sa-update, perhaps
> providing the updates in other package formats as well.
rpm packages does not install sa-update ?
i know yum, but dont make it the better sa-update :-)
it was worse enogh with rulesdujour
--
Ben
From: "Gary Funck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Theo wrote (in part):
sa-update is a generic tool that lets users download
"channels" (ie: bundles
of rules/plugins) from anywhere that decides to publish them
(requires a
certain setup, etc.) At the moment, the only published
channel that I know
of
From: "Theo Van Dinter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
There's nothing stoping the SARE folks from publishing a single or a
bunch of channels and getting rid of RDJ in favor of sa-update if they
wanted to... There are some benefits either way I suppose, and I'm biased
towards sa-update of course. :|
Um,
Logan Shaw wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Gary Funck wrote:
> > Has anyone considered also supplying new rules in the
> > form of rpm's available via a yum-compatible repository?
> > It'd be nice to have the usual versioning and logging
> > support as well as a central update facility. This
> > coul
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Gary Funck wrote:
Has anyone considered also supplying new rules in the
form of rpm's available via a yum-compatible repository?
It'd be nice to have the usual versioning and logging
support as well as a central update facility. This
could be done as a gateway to sa-update, p
Theo wrote (in part):
>
> sa-update is a generic tool that lets users download
> "channels" (ie: bundles
> of rules/plugins) from anywhere that decides to publish them
> (requires a
> certain setup, etc.) At the moment, the only published
> channel that I know
> of is updates.spamassassin.org
- Original Message -
From: "Gary Funck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 12:04 AM
Subject: RE: Image spam with inline jpeg image
Menno wrote:
Ramprasad wrote:
>
> But still this mail is getting thru
> http://ecm.netcore.co.in/tmp
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 09:58:19AM -0700, Richard wrote:
> > rules_du_jour was done when sa-update did not exists
>
> are you implying that sa-update replaces rules-du-jour?
That depends on what you mean by "replaces".
> i though sa-update updates the SA distro's bundled rules, but NOT any
> add
Richard wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
hi,
can the rules_du_jour script be config'd to pickup plugin updates as well?
i'd guess more than just an add to "TRUSTED_RULESETS"
everyone likes to have sa-update ruledujour now :-)
i'm sorry, i don't understand that sente
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
hi,
>> can the rules_du_jour script be config'd to pickup plugin updates as well?
>> i'd guess more than just an add to "TRUSTED_RULESETS"
>
> everyone likes to have sa-update ruledujour now :-)
i'm sorry, i don't understand that sentence.
> r
On Wed, August 9, 2006 16:39, Richard wrote:
>
> can the rules_du_jour script be config'd to pickup plugin updates as well?
> i'd guess more than just an add to "TRUSTED_RULESETS"
everyone likes to have sa-update ruledujour now :-)
rules_du_jour was done when sa-update did not exists
--
Benny
Menno wrote:
> Ramprasad wrote:
> >
> > But still this mail is getting thru
> > http://ecm.netcore.co.in/tmp/imagespam.txt
> >
> I tested your mail here with the latest imageinfo.pm and it comes through
> indeed. The exact same one in .gif (same text, same background)
> was detected
> though. It wa
Ramprasad wrote:
>
> But still this mail is getting thru
> http://ecm.netcore.co.in/tmp/imagespam.txt
>
I tested your mail here with the latest imageinfo.pm and it comes through
indeed. The exact same one in .gif (same text, same background) was detected
though. It was even my first and only i
> http://www.rulesemporium.com/plugins.htm#imageinfo
>
> Updates:
> - added optimization changes by Theo Van Dinter
> - added jpeg support
> - added function image_named()
> - added function image_size_exact()
> - added function image_size_range()
> - added function image_to_text_ratio()
>
>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
> Are you using the updated version OR the one originally posted?
>
> http://www.rulesemporium.com/plugins.htm#imageinfo
can the rules_du_jour script be config'd to pickup plugin updates as well?
i'd guess more than just an add to "TRUSTED_RULE
Ramprasad wrote:
All my rulesets and the LARGO rules are for catching inline png and
inline gif. Now I am getting stock spams with
images like
--=_NextPart_001_000C_01C6BBE8.11C02650--
--=_NextPart_000_000B_01C6BBE8.11BB4450
Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="militarism.jpg"
Content-T
45 matches
Mail list logo
