Seems to be working well. But before this new rule set the old spam
poisoned my bayes so I just purged all my bayes and starting over. That
way I won't get bayes_00 lowering the point score.
Bill Randle wrote:
>
> In the last 11 hours since I installed the plugin, it's caught 837
> messages.
>
Good for you!
I'm now at 11 hours too and in the meantime only 12 image spams came in, 11
were discarded by postfix rules, 1 new one came through and was catched by
SA but was not marked by t
Many Thanks Dallas, this plugin Rocks! It's amazing how many image only
spams this baby has flagged in the short time I've been running it.
-Original Message-
From: Dallas L. Engelken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 4:14 PM
To: dev@spamassassin.apache.org
Cc: u
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 09:20:41AM -0500, Dave Augustus wrote:
> > 7.162 8.3673 0.1.000 0.953.00 T_DC_GIF_UNO_LARGO
> > 4.016 4.6920 0.1.000 0.843.00 T_DC_IMAGE_SPAM
> > 0.666 0.7786 0.1.000 0.364.00 T_DC_GIF_MULTI_LARGO
> > 0.576 0
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 09:36:17AM +0200, Jim Knuth wrote:
> > Yeah, the files are in my sandbox:
> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/felicity/
>
> only the two files, ImageInfo.pm - 70_imageinfo.cf? And the
> others?
When talking about the ImageInfo stuff, yes, j
I'm having a bit of troubles to get this ImageInfo to hit anything.
For example the attached image gives no hit, maybe because it seems to be
snowing on the image or because I configured something wrong.
Could somebody check if this viewer81.gif picture triggers the imageinfo
rule?
(first time I
On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 04:22 -0700, MennovB wrote:
>
> Maurice Lucas wrote:
> >
> > Maybe i'm off there spamlist ;) but I think i'm just lucky for a few
> > hours.
> >
> I've got zero hits here sofar, very little image-spam comes in and what does
> is discarded by postfix rules.
> We'll see after
Pardon the question but how are you generating these stats?
Dave
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 21:35 -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 07:05:52PM -0500, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
> > > I made some major edits (1/3 smaller and also faster :) ),
> > > but the core algorithm is the
> -Original Message-
> From: Donald F. Caruana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 08:51
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: RE: ImageInfo plugin for SA
>
> Sorry if I missed it, but why such a large area for the GIF
> size? Or
al Message-
From: Dallas L. Engelken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 10:55 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: ImageInfo plugin for SA
> -Original Message-
> From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursd
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 07:26
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: RE: ImageInfo plugin for SA
>
> Dallas,
>
> one question/suggestion/feature request: I found quite
> -Original Message-
> From: Wolfgang Zeikat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 07:22
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ImageInfo plugin for SA
>
> Will that work in SA 3.0.*?
>
> Sorry for first sending that quest
Dallas,
one question/suggestion/feature request: I found quite a few GIF images in
spam are broken insofar as Image::Info (which you don't use) is unable to
report an images width and height (I presume due to the spammer's doing
around with the binary data).
Did you observe anything like it? If ye
Will that work in SA 3.0.*?
Sorry for first sending that question to you off list, Dallas.
cheers,
wolfgang
Maurice Lucas wrote:
>
> Maybe i'm off there spamlist ;) but I think i'm just lucky for a few
> hours.
>
I've got zero hits here sofar, very little image-spam comes in and what does
is discarded by postfix rules.
We'll see after the weekend..
Regards
Menno
--
View this message in context:
ht
On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 02:21 -0700, MennovB wrote:
>
> Matthias Keller wrote:
> >
> > It seems to load fine but I get some errors every time I run a check:
> > warn: plugin: failed to load plugin /etc/mail/spamassassin/ImageInfo.pm:
> > No such file or directory
> >
> Yes, I had to comment this
Matthias Keller wrote:
>
> It seems to load fine but I get some errors every time I run a check:
> warn: plugin: failed to load plugin /etc/mail/spamassassin/ImageInfo.pm:
> No such file or directory
>
Yes, I had to comment this line in 70_imageinfo.cf:
#loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::
Matthias Keller wrote:
Michele Neylon:: Blacknight.ie wrote:
Spamassassin List wrote:
Put the .pm file that is attached in your M::SA::Plugins dir. Add to
your init.pre (or v310.pre) the following line.
Where is the usual Plugins dir?
regards
It doesn't really matter as you ca
Matthias Keller wrote:
> Michele Neylon:: Blacknight.ie wrote:
>> Spamassassin List wrote:
>>
Put the .pm file that is attached in your M::SA::Plugins dir. Add
to your init.pre (or v310.pre) the following line.
>>> Where is the usual Plugins dir?
>>>
>>> regards
>>>
>> It doesn'
Michele Neylon:: Blacknight.ie wrote:
Spamassassin List wrote:
Put the .pm file that is attached in your M::SA::Plugins dir. Add to
your init.pre (or v310.pre) the following line.
Where is the usual Plugins dir?
regards
It doesn't really matter as you can specify the plugin lo
Heute (04.08.2006/02:50 Uhr) schrieb Theo Van Dinter,
> On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 02:38:48AM +0200, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
>> Could you post the altered one also somewhere ?
> Yeah, the files are in my sandbox:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/felicity/
only t
Spamassassin List wrote:
>> Put the .pm file that is attached in your M::SA::Plugins dir. Add to
>> your init.pre (or v310.pre) the following line.
>
> Where is the usual Plugins dir?
>
> regards
It doesn't really matter as you can specify the plugin location in the
*.pre file eg.
loadplugin Mai
> -Original Message-
> From: John Andersen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:42 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ImageInfo plugin for SA
>
> On Thursday 03 August 2006 16:50, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> > On Fri,
> -Original Message-
> From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:35 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ImageInfo plugin for SA
>
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 07:05:52PM -0500, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
&g
Depends.
Do a 'locate SPF.pm' and see where yours is.
Mine is at:
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/SPF.pm
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 05:42:17PM -0800, John Andersen wrote:
> So what happens next week when they switch to jpegs?
Sounds like a new function and set of rules. :)
> Btw: Very minor typo in:
> describe DC_PNG_UNO_LARGO Message contains a single large inline gif
>
> You mean png for t
Put the .pm file that is attached in your M::SA::Plugins dir. Add to
your init.pre (or v310.pre) the following line.
Where is the usual Plugins dir?
regards
On Thursday 03 August 2006 16:50, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 02:38:48AM +0200, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
> > Could you post the altered one also somewhere ?
>
> Yeah, the files are in my sandbox:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/felicity/
So
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 09:35:05PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Hrm. Not sure how T_DC_IMAGE_SPAM got a bump there -- it's the same set of
> input mail.
It occured to me as I was sending that DC_IMAGE_SPAM is a meta with the new
rule that's hitting.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
I'd love
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 07:05:52PM -0500, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
> > I made some major edits (1/3 smaller and also faster :) ),
> > but the core algorithm is the same. Overall, very good from
> > my results:
>
> Awesome... Thanks for that! But no *_MULTI_LARGO hits??? I have tons
> of the
Hi!
Could you post the altered one also somewhere ?
Yeah, the files are in my sandbox:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/felicity/
Ok, perfect. Running nice.
On one box i have it together with the ocr one. So far the 'cheaper' rule
is seeing about the same as
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 02:38:48AM +0200, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
> Could you post the altered one also somewhere ?
Yeah, the files are in my sandbox:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/felicity/
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Running Linux 1.2 Because a 486 is a
Theo,
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:14:06PM -0500, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
All those scores in the cf are just "WAGs", since none have been
masschecked. Theo, could you sandbox this?
I made some major edits (1/3 smaller and also faster :) ), but the core
algorithm is the same. Overall, ver
Very nice. Over 100 hits on one box in less than half an hour!
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Quality Business Hosting & Colocation
http://www.blacknight.ie/
Tel. 1850 927 280
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Fax. +353 (0) 59 9164239
> -Original Message-
> From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 6:52 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ImageInfo plugin for SA
>
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:14:06PM -0500, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
> &
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:14:06PM -0500, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
> All those scores in the cf are just "WAGs", since none have been
> masschecked. Theo, could you sandbox this?
I made some major edits (1/3 smaller and also faster :) ), but the core
algorithm is the same. Overall, very good f
Just a comment to Dallas that his (? making a guess there) ImageInfo
module seems to be doing a good job for me.
I had a small sample of image-spam that currently gets past SA. Almost
all of it scored +4/+5 points with his module activated.
I also had a few recent inline-images "real" emails - di
37 matches
Mail list logo
