On 24-3-2025 15:38, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 24.03.25 09:50, Dudi Goldenberg wrote:
Running SA v4.01 on Debian 12.10 with MariaDB backend.
The problem that I see is that the AWL table is properly updated with
new entries, totscore column is calculated, but msgcount always
remains 1 an
On 24.03.25 09:50, Dudi Goldenberg wrote:
Running SA v4.01 on Debian 12.10 with MariaDB backend.
The problem that I see is that the AWL table is properly updated with new
entries, totscore column is calculated, but msgcount always remains 1 and
never increments, as well as the lasthit column,
Sidney Markowitz wrote on 4/01/23 8:47 pm:
There's a typo, which must just be in your email since postgres won't
accept it, that should be =+ not +=
I am not expert it SQL :)
Further testing reveals that there is no auto-increment operator in
postgres or SQLite SQL, neither += nor =+
The r
Benny Pedersen wrote on 4/01/23 11:00 am:
https://github.com/apache/spamassassin/blob/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/SQLBasedAddrList.pm#L289
$sql .= " ON CONFLICT (username, email, signedby, ip) DO UPDATE set
msgcount = ?, totscore += ?";
confirm is from my side needed it would fix it, i atleast
Ángel wrote on 4/01/23 2:59 pm:
On 2023-01-04 at 10:24 +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
If anyone else reading this is using 4.0.0 and postgres for AWL, are
you seeing or not seeing this problem?
I can easily reproduce this with a quick install and manually providing
the SQL from the code (outpu
On 2023-01-03 at 23:00 +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> https://github.com/apache/spamassassin/blob/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/SQLBasedAddrList.pm#L289
>
> $sql .= " ON CONFLICT (username, email, signedby, ip) DO UPDATE set
> msgcount = ?, totscore += ?";
>
> confirm is from my side needed it wou
On 2023-01-04 at 10:24 +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> If anyone else reading this is using 4.0.0 and postgres for AWL, are
> you seeing or not seeing this problem?
I can easily reproduce this with a quick install and manually providing
the SQL from the code (output included below). Postgresql (t
On Wed, 2023-01-04 at 00:43 +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>
> i have dumped all i have in posgres without data so only structure is
> here
>
> https://usercontent.irccloud-cdn.com/file/WJmDq7xc/spamassassin_dump_tables%20only.txt
>
> dont know what package means on gentoo, its stable versions i
Martin Gregorie skrev den 2023-01-03 23:43:
On Wed, 2023-01-04 at 10:24 +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
Benny Pedersen wrote on 4/01/23 3:19 am:
If anyone else reading this is using 4.0.0 and postgres for AWL, are
you
seeing or not seeing this problem?
I use Postgresql, though not with SA.
I
On Wed, 2023-01-04 at 10:24 +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Benny Pedersen wrote on 4/01/23 3:19 am:
>
> If anyone else reading this is using 4.0.0 and postgres for AWL, are
> you
> seeing or not seeing this problem?
>
I use Postgresql, though not with SA.
I agree with your suggestion, but it
Sidney Markowitz skrev den 2023-01-03 22:24:
Benny Pedersen wrote on 4/01/23 3:19 am:
https://github.com/apache/spamassassin/blob/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/SQLBasedAddrList.pm#L310
imho this line
I agree, but I don't see from looking at that line how the SQL query
can have more than one tab
Benny Pedersen wrote on 4/01/23 3:19 am:
https://github.com/apache/spamassassin/blob/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/SQLBasedAddrList.pm#L310
imho this line
I agree, but I don't see from looking at that line how the SQL query can
have more than one table involved, and from the description of what
Sidney Markowitz skrev den 2023-01-03 10:53:
Benny Pedersen wrote on 3/01/23 2:21 pm:
https://github.com/apache/spamassassin/blob/trunk/sql/awl_pg.sql#L6
https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/wRkT4AeI/awl.sql
how to solve it ?
The sql error means that there is more than one table in the sql
sta
Benny Pedersen wrote on 3/01/23 2:21 pm:
https://github.com/apache/spamassassin/blob/trunk/sql/awl_pg.sql#L6
https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/wRkT4AeI/awl.sql
how to solve it ?
The sql error means that there is more than one table in the sql
statement that has a column named "totscore" and
>
> https://github.com/apache/spamassassin/blob/trunk/sql/awl_pg.sql#L6
>
> https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/wRkT4AeI/awl.sql
>
> how to solve it ?
https://notepad.ltd/asdf23423asdfasdf ;)
as Intended (TM). I've not set txrep_autolearn on yet, will
monitor for a while.
Simon
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 3:04 AM Simon Wilson wrote:
- Message from John Hardin -
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 08:08:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Hardin
Subject: Re: AWL on
wrote:
> - Message from John Hardin -
> Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 08:08:17 -0700 (PDT)
> From: John Hardin
> Subject: Re: AWL on 3.4
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>
>
> > On Sun, 21 Mar 2021, Simon Wilson wrote:
> >
> >> I've just migr
- Message from John Hardin -
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 08:08:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Hardin
Subject: Re: AWL on 3.4
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
On Sun, 21 Mar 2021, Simon Wilson wrote:
I've just migrated and updated to SA 3.4, and have moved the Bayes
On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 00:36:05 +1000
Simon Wilson wrote:
> I've just migrated and updated to SA 3.4, and have moved the Bayes db
> to Redis. I used to use AWL but don't think the module is loaded in
> 3.4, am I correct?
It's just a matter of uncommenting the line in v310.pre
I don't think it was
On Sun, 21 Mar 2021, Simon Wilson wrote:
I've just migrated and updated to SA 3.4, and have moved the Bayes db to
Redis. I used to use AWL but don't think the module is loaded in 3.4, am I
correct?
There seems to be mixed commentary online about whether to enable it - I'll
leave it off for a
On 18.10.2019 17.41, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 10/17/2019 2:30 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
Just a side note: AWL is deprecated and replaced by TXREP which works in
similar fashion but better,
Just read through the man page for TXREP, which looks pretty interesting. I'm
thinking of switching
On 10/17/2019 2:30 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
>
> Just a side note: AWL is deprecated and replaced by TXREP which works in
> similar fashion but better,
>
Just read through the man page for TXREP, which looks pretty interesting. I'm
thinking of switching my system over. Is there a guide somewhe
On 16.10.2019 16.19, John Schmerold wrote:
Is the AWL score generated based on the experience of my server, or are
other external sources feeding AWL?
I have a client, they sent me an email, they were dinged with an AWL of
3.575, my SA server was configured a couple days ago, so it hasn't had
On 16 Oct 2019, at 9:19, John Schmerold wrote:
Is the AWL score generated based on the experience of my server, or
are other external sources feeding AWL?
AWL is entirely local. The keys are tuples of the first 3 octets of the
client IP and the sender address.
On a new server, it is general
Good day!
You were completely right: after I added '-u debian-spamd' (this user was
automatically created at the time of package installation) to the spamd
start string in the /etc/default/spamassassin AWL started working right as
expected. The database is now filled almost as expected:
*
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 15:07:36 +0300
? wrote:
> No, spamd is running as user "root", so I don't have the "-u" key
> anywhere in the smapd configs. I'm sorry for not making this clear
> enough.
>
> What I meant to say is that when I send or receive a message through
> my Exim (on the r
Good day!
Thanks for your reply.
No, spamd is running as user "root", so I don't have the "-u" key anywhere
in the smapd configs. I'm sorry for not making this clear enough.
What I meant to say is that when I send or receive a message through my
Exim (on the remote host) it passes the message to
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 10:21:44 +0300
? wrote:
> I'm using Spamassassin 3.4.0 on Debian Jessie and trying to set up AWL
> stored in SQL on a per-user basis. My setup is as follows:
>
> 1) Spamassassin is run as 'spamd' on behalf of user root, the options
> string is as follows:
Is spam
On 12/23/2015 2:09 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
i ve read some bug reports , any recent news to this ?
Unfortunately, no. Bug at
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7164 has gruesome
details.
Regards,
KAM
Am 23.12.2015 um 17:41 schrieb Reindl Harald:
>
>
> Am 23.12.2015 um 17:33 schrieb Olivier CALVANO:
>> Thanks, i clear the AWL and now it's good
>> thanks
>>
>> for TxRep, do you know where i can find this module and the
>> documentation ?
>
> enter "TxRep" in google leads to
> https://wiki.apac
Am 23.12.2015 um 17:33 schrieb Olivier CALVANO:
Thanks, i clear the AWL and now it's good
thanks
for TxRep, do you know where i can find this module and the documentation ?
enter "TxRep" in google leads to
https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/TxRep
[root@localhost:~]$ locate TxRep
/usr/shar
What version of spamassassin are you using as it was added to the standard
package.
You might have better luck with trunk or waiting for 3.4.2.
Regards,
KAM
On December 23, 2015 11:33:21 AM EST, Olivier CALVANO
wrote:
>Thanks, i clear the AWL and now it's good
>thanks
>
>for TxRep, do you know
Thanks, i clear the AWL and now it's good
thanks
for TxRep, do you know where i can find this module and the documentation ?
2015-12-23 16:57 GMT+01:00 Joe Quinn :
> On 12/23/2015 10:53 AM, Olivier CALVANO wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> i have installed a new server on Centos with Postfix/Amavisd and
>> S
On 12/23/2015 10:53 AM, Olivier CALVANO wrote:
Hi
i have installed a new server on Centos with Postfix/Amavisd and
SpamAssassin
my problems, 90% of mail are tagged spam:
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Score: 22.876
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=22.876 required=5.0 t
Am 30.04.2015 um 17:06 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas skrev den 2015-04-30 12:55:
no, it's the "dig" command that does the trace, not the nameserver.
This says nothing about your nameserver configuration, and it can't since
nameserver does not provide that info.
dig respects
Matus UHLAR - fantomas skrev den 2015-04-30 12:55:
no, it's the "dig" command that does the trace, not the nameserver.
This says nothing about your nameserver configuration, and it can't
since
nameserver does not provide that info.
dig respects resolv.conf with nameserver 127.0.0.1
try it :
Tom Robinson skrev den 2015-04-30 04:35:
Finally that makes sense. I will add the forwarding in as per the
documentation.
remove forwarding is safe, only use forward dns on zones you self build
or have rsync access to
Tom Robinson skrev den 2015-04-30 04:14:
Actually, looking for this config I can't seem to find it. My
spamassassin is linked in with qmail
using qmail-scanner-queue.pl. That script looks in
/home/qscand/.spamassassin/user_prefs but I also
have configs in /etc/mail/spamassassin. What am I lookin
On 4/30/15, 5:55 AM, "Matus UHLAR - fantomas" wrote:
>no, it's the "dig" command that does the trace, not the nameserver.
>This says nothing about your nameserver configuration, and it can't since
>nameserver does not provide that info.
I stand corrected-- I had tested on another machine that us
On 30/04/15 09:56, Marieke Janssen wrote:
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was
blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more informa
Am 30.04.2015 um 12:55 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
On 4/30/15, 12:16 AM, "Tom Robinson" wrote:
BTW, where can I see the results of my configuration changes? It
would be
nice to confirm that my
changes have rectified the situation.
On 30.04.15 01:38, Dave Pooser wrote:
On the server (via
>On the server (via SSH or console) use the +trace argument to dig, and
>then look for lines starting with ';;':
>postmstr@smtp:~$ dig +trace example.com.multi.uribl.com | grep ';;'
>;; global options: +cmd
>;; Received 913 bytes from 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) in 8 ms
>;; Received 760 bytes from 199
On 4/30/15, 12:16 AM, "Tom Robinson" wrote:
BTW, where can I see the results of my configuration changes? It would be
nice to confirm that my
changes have rectified the situation.
On 30.04.15 01:38, Dave Pooser wrote:
On the server (via SSH or console) use the +trace argument to dig, and
then
On 4/30/15, 12:16 AM, "Tom Robinson" wrote:
>BTW, where can I see the results of my configuration changes? It would be
>nice to confirm that my
>changes have rectified the situation.
On the server (via SSH or console) use the +trace argument to dig, and
then look for lines starting with ';;':
p
Am 30.04.2015 um 07:16 schrieb Tom Robinson:
On 30/04/15 15:09, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 30.04.2015 um 04:10 schrieb Tom Robinson:
Is it correct that currently, because I'm forwarding, the DNSBL query is
denied because the DNSBL server thinks I'm the ISP making a query? Sorry, I'm
not under
On 30/04/15 15:09, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 30.04.2015 um 04:10 schrieb Tom Robinson:
>> Is it correct that currently, because I'm forwarding, the DNSBL query is
>> denied because the DNSBL server thinks I'm the ISP making a query? Sorry,
>> I'm not understanding the
>> mechanism
>
> it is th
Am 30.04.2015 um 04:10 schrieb Tom Robinson:
Is it correct that currently, because I'm forwarding, the DNSBL query is
denied because the DNSBL server thinks I'm the ISP making a query? Sorry, I'm
not understanding the
mechanism
it is the ISP making the query for you and thousands of other of
Am 30.04.2015 um 04:10 schrieb Tom Robinson:
I have the mail server and a separate name server set up in a DMZ. The name
server already runs as a
caching nameserver but does forwarding to our ISP
don't do that when you are running mailservers or for whateverer reason
rely on trustable names
On 30/04/15 12:15, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> On 4/29/2015 10:10 PM, Tom Robinson wrote:
>> I have the mail server and a separate name server set up in a DMZ. The name
>> server already runs as a
>> caching nameserver but does forwarding to our ISP.
> Hi Tom,
>
> Your ISP is doing too many queries
On 4/29/2015 10:10 PM, Tom Robinson wrote:
I have the mail server and a separate name server set up in a DMZ. The name
server already runs as a
caching nameserver but does forwarding to our ISP.
Hi Tom,
Your ISP is doing too many queries to the services exceeding free
limits. You are being l
Tom Robinson
IT Manager/System Administrator
MoTeC Pty Ltd
121 Merrindale Drive
Croydon South
3136 Victoria
Australia
T: +61 3 9761 5050
F: +61 3 9761 5051
E: tom.robin...@motec.com.au
On 30/04/15 10:10, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> Tom Robinson skrev den 2015-04-30 01:38:
>
>> 0.0 URIBL_BLOCK
On 30/04/15 09:56, Marieke Janssen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Besides your awl problem, you have other problems.
>
> 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was
> blocked.
> See
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/D
Tom Robinson skrev den 2015-04-30 01:38:
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL
was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
did you read the url here ?
well if yes, show your AWL config for the AWL
Hi,
Besides your awl problem, you have other problems.
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was
blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for
Ok Thanks for the answer :)
Marco
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 07:58:15 -0400
"Kevin A. McGrail" wrote:
> On 4/17/2015 6:46 AM, ma...@nucleus.it wrote:
> > Hi to all,
> > a saw that from spamassassin 3.4 Bayes can be stored on a Redis
> > database.
> >
> > Is it possible also for Awl (auto_whitelist) ?
On 4/17/2015 7:58 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 4/17/2015 6:46 AM, ma...@nucleus.it wrote:
Hi to all,
a saw that from spamassassin 3.4 Bayes can be stored on a Redis
database.
Is it possible also for Awl (auto_whitelist) ?
Or maybe in the future ?
We are currently looking at TxRep as a replace
On 4/17/2015 6:46 AM, ma...@nucleus.it wrote:
Hi to all,
a saw that from spamassassin 3.4 Bayes can be stored on a Redis
database.
Is it possible also for Awl (auto_whitelist) ?
Or maybe in the future ?
We are currently looking at TxRep as a replacement for AWL but no,
neither of them lends the
I got it all wrong: I was assuming that AWL works by using a tuple consisting
of to/from (in the database: username/mail). Now thanks to your explanation I
got it that the username is in fact only used for user-bound AWL. This means
that I can simply use site-wide AWL.
TxRep sounds quite promis
ML mail skrev den 2014-06-26 16:42:
Ok so if I understand you correctly you are saying that it is possible
to use AWL as site-wide having just one part of the e-mail exchange
(the "To:" field) and this works fine/reliabily?
incorrect question, incorrect answer :=)
the username in awl is the un
Kevin A. McGrail skrev den 2014-06-26 16:34:
But the reason I'm posting is that many servers run sitewide AWL
without issue. Why do you feel it is useless?
multi recipient is handled better in amavisd-new, but its not very well
dokumented, if you always just get single recipient spams its not
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 07:42:50 -0700
ML mail wrote:
> Ok so if I understand you correctly you are saying that it is
> possible to use AWL as site-wide having just one part of the e-mail
> exchange (the "To:" field) and this works fine/reliabily?
To: isn't relevant, you either have site-wide or per
Ok so if I understand you correctly you are saying that it is possible to use
AWL as site-wide having just one part of the e-mail exchange (the "To:" field)
and this works fine/reliabily?
On Thursday, June 26, 2014 4:34 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 6/26/2014 10:31 AM, ML mail wrote:
I a
On 6/26/2014 10:31 AM, ML mail wrote:
I am using the auto-whitelist feature of SpamAssassin stored into a
PostgreSQL database. It works fine but I have got one issue: as I am
calling SA from amavisd-new, the username stored in the AWL SQL table
is always "amavis". Now this renders my AWL useles
On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 22:32:02 +0100
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 12:48 -0800, JP Kelly wrote:
> > I'm not familiar enough to tell if an address is forged or not.
> > Here is the scoring from one of the spam messages from
> > autoconf...@amazon.com which I suspect tainted AWL:
On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 12:48 -0800, JP Kelly wrote:
> I'm not familiar enough to tell if an address is forged or not. Here is
> the scoring from one of the spam messages from autoconf...@amazon.com
> which I suspect tainted AWL:
Nope. The originating IP isn't even close to the Amazon net-block, let
I'm not familiar enough to tell if an address is forged or not.
Here is the scoring from one of the spam messages from autoconf...@amazon.com
which I suspect tainted AWL:
Content analysis details: (29.4 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
-- --
On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 11:39 -0800, JP Kelly wrote:
> Yeah that sender's email address had been forged for a bunch of spam I
> received.
Without reading the following paragraph, I'd immediately suspect a
cracked account, not address forgery. The AWL is limited by address and
originating net-block (
Yeah that sender's email address had been forged for a bunch of spam I received.
I used spamasassin --remove-addr-from-whitelist for that address
Also I did not have internal_networks and trusted_networks lines in my
local.cf, which I added.
Hopefully that will help.
Thanks!
On Mar 6, 2011, at 1
On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 10:51 -0800, JP Kelly wrote:
> I just found an incoming message which is ham but marked as spam.
> It received a score of 14 because it is in the auto white-list.
> Shouldn't it receive a negative score?
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AwlWrongWay
Despite its name, the A
Not necessarily. AWL both increases and decreases scores, based on
previous emails: http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AutoWhitelist
On 03/06, JP Kelly wrote:
> I just found an incoming message which is ham but marked as spam.
> It received a score of 14 because it is in the auto white-list.
> S
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:51:19 -0400
Matt Kettler wrote:
> On 8/11/2010 1:30 PM, RW wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 07:48:11 -0400
> > Matt Kettler wrote:
> >
> >> 1) lack of expiry process causes unbounded database growth.
> >> There's a script to clean out single-hit entries, but multi-hit
> >>
On 8/11/2010 1:30 PM, RW wrote:
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 07:48:11 -0400
Matt Kettler wrote:
1) lack of expiry process causes unbounded database growth. There's a
script to clean out single-hit entries, but multi-hit persist
forever, even when stale. (there are no timestamps on entries, so
expiry i
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 22:26:31 +0200
Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On ons 11 aug 2010 19:35:35 CEST, RW wrote
>
> > That should be count/total-score not count/token.
>
> total-score/count
I actually meant it in the sense of "a-stroke-b" rather than
"a-divided-by-b"
> will also work with mask of 0
On ons 11 aug 2010 19:35:35 CEST, RW wrote
That should be count/total-score not count/token.
total-score/count
will also work with mask of 0.0.0.0/8 ?
sa below 3.3.x had it hardcoded to /16
--
xpoint http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:30:17 +0100
RW wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 07:48:11 -0400
> Matt Kettler wrote:
>
> > 1) lack of expiry process causes unbounded database growth. There's
> > a script to clean out single-hit entries, but multi-hit persist
> > forever, even when stale. (there are no times
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 07:48:11 -0400
Matt Kettler wrote:
> 1) lack of expiry process causes unbounded database growth. There's a
> script to clean out single-hit entries, but multi-hit persist
> forever, even when stale. (there are no timestamps on entries, so
> expiry isn't possible at present).
On 8/10/2010 7:55 PM, Dennis German wrote:
On Jul 22, 2010, at 10:47 AM, Michael Scheidell wrote:...
due to performance vs accuracy issues, AWL was demoted in SA 3.3x.
Can you please define "demoted".
Changed from enabled by default to disabled by default, larg
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:55:45 -0400
Dennis German wrote:
> On Jul 22, 2010, at 10:47 AM, Michael Scheidell wrote:...
> due to performance vs accuracy issues, AWL was demoted in SA 3.3x.
>
> Can you please define "demoted".
It's no longer on by default.
On 10-Aug-2010, at 17:55, Dennis German wrote:
>
> My ISP MidPhase.com, part of uk2group.com, uses cpanel.net (used by many
> ISPs)
> which seems to be "stuck" on SpamAssassin 3.2.4 (2008-01-01)
>
> I request they upgrade last year and they weren't interested.
> I request this last week and
On ons 11 aug 2010 01:55:45 CEST, Dennis German wrote
I request they upgrade last year and they weren't interested.
I request this last week and they are still evaluating it.
you speak to the wrong people that maintains you server hosting and
belive thay also make the spamassassin packages f
On 7/22/2010 11:07 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
> On 7/22/2010 10:32 AM, Eric A. Hall wrote:
>> If the current code is intended, I'd like to request a new function call
>> that tells if the tuple exists and the number of times it has been seen
>
> For what purpose? (Not trying to be mean, just asking
On 7/22/2010 10:47 AM, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> On 7/22/10 10:32 AM, Eric A. Hall wrote:
>> Sometimes the AWL rule doesn't appear in the list. From looking at the
>>
> due to performance vs accuracy issues, AWL was demoted in SA 3.3x.
>
> It might not be worth the cpu cycles
>
Slight Correcti
On 7/22/2010 10:32 AM, Eric A. Hall wrote:
> Sometimes the AWL rule doesn't appear in the list.
That's correct.
At the very least, The AWL is a score averager, so the first message
from a given From: and source IP combination cannot be AWLed. This
definitely will cause a no-show. You need an exist
On tor 22 jul 2010 16:47:21 CEST, Michael Scheidell wrote
On 7/22/10 10:32 AM, Eric A. Hall wrote:
Sometimes the AWL rule doesn't appear in the list. From looking at the
due to performance vs accuracy issues, AWL was demoted in SA 3.3x.
well if running awl as it was 3.2.x then its wasting cpu
On 7/22/2010 11:24 AM, RW wrote:
> I don't recall seeing anything like that. Are sure it's not due to the
> IP address changing or AWL being short-circuited?
My testing is with local message files. If I use sa-awl to dump the
database I can see the counter increment, but the rule doesn't fire unl
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 10:32:37 -0400
"Eric A. Hall" wrote:
>
> Sometimes the AWL rule doesn't appear in the list. From looking at the
> behavior it seems that the rule is only guaranteed to fire if the
> stored score for the tuple is significantly different than the
> message score, or if the stor
On 7/22/10 10:32 AM, Eric A. Hall wrote:
Sometimes the AWL rule doesn't appear in the list. From looking at the
due to performance vs accuracy issues, AWL was demoted in SA 3.3x.
It might not be worth the cpu cycles
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
Phone: 561-999-5000, x 1259
> *| *SECNAP Network
On 4/9/2010 4:33 PM, Dennis B. Hopp wrote:
> I have AWL enabled and it seems to be ok with helping out legitimate
> senders that occasionally send a "spammy" type message, but lately I
> have seen an increase where AWL is adding a negative score to a very
> blatant spam.
>
As long as it's not
On Fri, 9 Apr 2010, Dennis B. Hopp wrote:
I know how AWL works and occasionally it will lower the score of a spam,
but it just seems to be happening more often lately.
Maybe the rulesets are improving and scoring spams higher than spams from
the same source have historically been scoring...?
On fre 09 apr 2010 22:33:39 CEST, "Dennis B. Hopp" wrote
Is there a way to have the AWL rule only triggered if there is a minimum
number of messages seen by that sender?
if AWL helping spam, then you need to prevent forged senders more
in sa 3.2.5 set
ifplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::AWL
> Not that I'm aware of.
>
> Is the AWL score enough to prevent the messages from being marked as
> spam, or are you seeing the negative AWL score on messages that are
> marked as spam? It is normal for AWL to give negative scores to spam
> from time to time, but for the most part, it should not
Dennis B. Hopp wrote:
> I have AWL enabled and it seems to be ok with helping out legitimate
> senders that occasionally send a "spammy" type message, but lately I
> have seen an increase where AWL is adding a negative score to a very
> blatant spam.
>
> So my questions are, do people feel AWL is
On 27.1.2010 10:43, Henrik K wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:38:38AM +0200, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
>>
>> I'm trying to install it via CPAN or debian deb, so I do not have the
>> sql-readme available.
>>
>> The AWL format changed, can someone post the MySQL desc output please?
>
> http://svn.a
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:38:38AM +0200, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
>
> I'm trying to install it via CPAN or debian deb, so I do not have the
> sql-readme available.
>
> The AWL format changed, can someone post the MySQL desc output please?
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/branches/3.3
> memcache is nice, but how do you use memcache data in postfix ?
There is a patch for memcached and postfix. The problem is, which is what I'm
working on, is how to populate it. They only give you the mechanism for using
memcached. (http://www.aurore.net/projects/postfix_memcached/)
So,
>>>postmap -q "weekendhotdeals.info" mysql:/usr/local/etc/postfix/mysql-
>>>from_senders_rhsbl.cf
>>>554 RHSBL_DOMAIN
>
>post the mysql map
it's a two-field table, just like a postfix .map file, index + data
1. rhsbl_domain
2. 554 RHSBL_DOMAIN
>, without password of course if you want to shar
On Thu 27 Aug 2009 12:08:47 AM CEST, Gary Smith wrote
I don't let that junk get past envelope stage:
postmap -q "weekendhotdeals.info" mysql:/usr/local/etc/postfix/mysql-
from_senders_rhsbl.cf
554 RHSBL_DOMAIN
post the mysql map, without password of course if you want to share
it, but i bel
> I don't let that junk get past envelope stage:
>
> postmap -q "weekendhotdeals.info" mysql:/usr/local/etc/postfix/mysql-
> from_senders_rhsbl.cf
> 554 RHSBL_DOMAIN
>
I assume you are running some type of background process that generates the
list of senders based upon some criteria. Can you
-- Original Message --
From: Gary Smith
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 12:29:24 -0700
>I've been finding a lot of singletons in the AWL db for domains that are all
>spam. Is there a way put an entire domain into AWL or set it up to give an
>average score for th
[Top-posting fixed]
On 28-May-2009, at 10:13, Dennis German wrote:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On Mittwoch 27 Mai 2009 LuKreme wrote
No, you are confused. This is common, lots of people are
confused about this. This is why many people think the name
needs to be changed to "Averaged Weigh
1 - 100 of 430 matches
Mail list logo
