Re: REMOVE

On Fri, 18 Feb 2022, da...@grmcompany.com wrote: Dan: The SA users mailing list is self-managed. list-unsubscribe: -- John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ jhar...@impsec.org p

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 09:20:56 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > >> >> > On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 06:13:06 -0600 @lbutlr wrote: > >> >> >> I have a script that runs when a mail is moved out of the > >> >> >> Junk folder to pass the mail through sa-learn --ham, > > >> >You can work around the plu

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

>> > On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 06:13:06 -0600 @lbutlr wrote: >> >> I have a script that runs when a mail is moved out of the Junk >> >> folder to pass the mail through sa-learn --ham, >You can work around the plugin's deficiencies by using autotraining >or doing some additional training, but then the

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 10:41:51 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > >> > On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 06:13:06 -0600 @lbutlr wrote: > >> >> I have a script that runs when a mail is moved out of the Junk > >> >> folder to pass the mail through sa-learn --ham, > > >You can work around the plugin's defic

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

> On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 06:13:06 -0600 @lbutlr wrote: >> I have a script that runs when a mail is moved out of the Junk >> folder to pass the mail through sa-learn --ham, I think this is what the dovecot's Antispam plugin does: https://wiki2.dovecot.org/Plugins/Antispam and maybe ImapSieve: http

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:13:04 -0600 @lbutlr wrote: > On 18 Jun 2018, at 08:47, RW wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 06:13:06 -0600 > > @lbutlr wrote: > > > >> I have a script that runs when a mail is moved out of the Junk > >> folder to pass the mail through sa-learn --ham, > > > > > > Whethe

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On 18 Jun 2018, at 10:13, @lbutlr wrote: > #!/bin/sh > exec /usr/local/bin/spamassassin -d ${1} && /usr/local/bin/sa-learn -u ${1} > --ham Sorry, tyop from memory. #!/bin/sh exec /usr/local/bin/spamassassin -d && /usr/local/bin/sa-learn -u ${1} --ham I think what I am going to do is enable re

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On 18 Jun 2018, at 08:47, RW wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 06:13:06 -0600 > @lbutlr wrote: > >> I have a script that runs when a mail is moved out of the Junk folder >> to pass the mail through sa-learn --ham, > > > Whether this is the Dovecot plugin or something local it's a poor way > of tr

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:44:15 +0100 Martin Gregorie wrote: > On Mon, 2018-06-18 at 14:26 +0100, RW wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:11:16 +0100 > > Martin Gregorie wrote: > > > > > > > I normally use an awk script for this sort of job because they are > > > short, easy to write and run fast

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 06:13:06 -0600 @lbutlr wrote: > I have a script that runs when a mail is moved out of the Junk folder > to pass the mail through sa-learn --ham, Whether this is the Dovecot plugin or something local it's a poor way of training Bayes. You're training on SA errors not Bayes e

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On Mon, 2018-06-18 at 14:26 +0100, RW wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:11:16 +0100 > Martin Gregorie wrote: > > > > I normally use an awk script for this sort of job because they are > > short, easy to write and run fast. > > There's no point in the OP doing this, since sa-learn ignores these

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:11:16 +0100 Martin Gregorie wrote: > I normally use an awk script for this sort of job because they are > short, easy to write and run fast. There's no point in the OP doing this, since sa-learn ignores these headers.

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On Mon, 2018-06-18 at 06:13 -0600, @lbutlr wrote: > I have a script that runs when a mail is moved out of the Junk folder > to pass the mail through sa-learn --ham, but it doesn’t removed the > subject tagging (Spam: 05.5) nor does it remove the X-Spam-Flag > header. > > What would I need to do in

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:42:39 +0200 Tom Hendrikx wrote: want to see the result of Junk filtering in you MUA, > don't tag the subject, and do everything based on the SA headers. And X-Spam-* headers are ignored.

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

Hi, "Moving out of the Junk folder" definitely sounds like IMAP. In the IMAP standard, messages can't be changed after delivery. To alter the message (change subject, remove headers), you'll need to delete the old message, and create a new, altered message. This is bad for caching, and could mess

Re: Remove SA tagging when learning as ham

I'd look at https://serverfault.com/questions/817928/procmailrc-change-email-subject -- Kevin A. McGrail VP Fundraising, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171 On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 8:13 AM, @lbutlr wrote: > I

Re: remove

On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 23:14 -0500, Steve Bergman wrote: > On 07/03/2014 11:05 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > Care to elaborate on this? > > All I really have to "elaborate upon" is my typo. "that" instead of "than". That actually was bugging me every single time I re-read that sentence. ;)

Re: remove

On 07/03/2014 11:05 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 22:49 -0500, Steve Bergman wrote: Care to elaborate on this? All I really have to "elaborate upon" is my typo. "that" instead of "than". Irrespective of whether English is or is not your native language, you are notab

Re: remove

On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 22:49 -0500, Steve Bergman wrote: > On 07/03/2014 09:58 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > > Steve, may I ask why you are interested in this? > > I was interested in just how a list of this nature ends up getting > administered, relative to other OSS lists. And I think you'

Re: remove

On 07/03/2014 09:58 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: Steve, may I ask why you are interested in this? I was interested in just how a list of this nature ends up getting administered, relative to other OSS lists. And I think you've answered my question more thoroughly that you might have inte

Re: remove

On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 21:02 -0500, Steve Bergman wrote: > Is the originator of this thread still receiving unsolicited bulk email > from this list? Steve, may I ask why you are interested in this? As a SA PMC member and list moderator, I do know the answer to that question, or rather can query t

Re: remove

On 2014-07-03 17:54, Philip Prindeville wrote: Which reminds me: is there a ‘reflector’ address anyone can mail to which will verify their SPF and DKIM records? Or… no, I guess such a beast would be susceptible to reflector attacks from spoofed addresses… so it’s a dumb question. Unless it c

Re: remove

Is the originator of this thread still receiving unsolicited bulk email from this list?

Re: remove

On Jul 3, 2014, at 2:43 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 15:32 -0400, Lee Dilkie wrote: >> cute.. >> >> his is the mail system at host relay.mailchannels.net. >> >> I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not >> be delivered to one or more recipients. It's

Re: remove

On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 15:32 -0400, Lee Dilkie wrote: > cute.. > > his is the mail system at host relay.mailchannels.net. > > I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not > be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below. > Remote-MTA: dns; mx1.us.apache.org > Diagnosti

Re: remove

On 2014-07-03 11:51, Brent Kennedy wrote: remove Try list-unsubscribe: instead? -- Dave Warren http://www.hireahit.com/ http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren

Re: remove

On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 14:51 -0400, Brent Kennedy wrote: > remove Self service. To unsubscribe, send a mail to the appropriate address below, NOT the list. From the headers of every single list post: list-help: list-unsubscribe:

Re: Remove spam results from mail header

On Sun, 16 Mar 2014, Re@lබණ්ඩා™ wrote: Hi All, Is there a way to disable spam results from been published to the mail header? Usually, depending upon how spamassassin is hooked into your mail system. Looking at your example message I don't see any "Checker-Version" header which normally SA sy

Re: Remove spam results from mail header

I think you need to set some of these options in your local.cf BASIC MESSAGE TAGGING OPTIONS remove_header { spam | ham | all } header_name Headers can be removed from the specified type of messages (spam, ham, or ``all'' to remove from either). All headers begin with X-Spam- (so header_name will

Re: REMOVE my email , Thanks

On ons 28 apr 2010 03:25:26 CEST, BILLY/NICER wrote Please REMOVE my email address from your list, everyday have too many email forward to me. List-Help: users-h...@spamassassin.apache.org List-Unsubscribe: users-unsubscr...@spamassassin.apache.org List-Post: users@spamassassin

Re: REMOVE my email , Thanks

Dear Sir, Please REMOVE my email address from your list, everyday have too many email forward to me. Thanks & Best Regards, Billy Lau Direct Line:(852) 3969 0684 / Cell Phone:(852) 9220 1286 Email: sal...@fashionable.com.hk Nicer Fashion Ltd. Tel:(852) 3969 0688 FAX:(852) 2361 9964 URL: www

Re: remove SURBL rules

LuKreme wrote: > On 16-Dec-2008, at 23:57, ram wrote: >> http://www.surbl.org/usage-policy.html > > > I did the 'request a quote'. For 3,000 users and 550,000 emails a day > (hey, i was just making up numbers here) the cost is US$600/year. If > you're a non-profit it's $500/year. > > Consideri

RE: remove SURBL rules

> -Original Message- > From: u...@3.am [mailto:u...@3.am] > Sent: 2008-12-17 23:16 > To: SA Mailing list > Subject: Re: remove SURBL rules > > > On Wed, 17 Dec 2008, LuKreme wrote: > > > On 16-Dec-2008, at 23:57, ram wrote: > >> http://www.sur

Re: Remove

If you want to unsubscribe, follow what the headers say: list-unsubscribe: PS: I know of no lists where you e-mail a COMMAND to the entire list. Doesn't work that way. kchri...@hambrosalle.dk wrote:

Re: remove SURBL rules

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008, LuKreme wrote: On 16-Dec-2008, at 23:57, ram wrote: http://www.surbl.org/usage-policy.html I did the 'request a quote'. For 3,000 users and 550,000 emails a day (hey, i was just making up numbers here) the cost is US$600/year. If you're a non-profit it's $500/year.

Re: remove SURBL rules

LuKreme a écrit : > On 16-Dec-2008, at 23:57, ram wrote: >> http://www.surbl.org/usage-policy.html > > > I did the 'request a quote'. For 3,000 users and 550,000 emails a day > (hey, i was just making up numbers here) the cost is US$600/year. If > you're a non-profit it's $500/year. > > Conside

Re: remove SURBL rules

On 16-Dec-2008, at 23:57, ram wrote: http://www.surbl.org/usage-policy.html I did the 'request a quote'. For 3,000 users and 550,000 emails a day (hey, i was just making up numbers here) the cost is US$600/year. If you're a non-profit it's $500/year. Considering that includes SUPPORT, t

Re: remove SURBL rules

Karsten Bräckelmann a écrit : > Back on-list. > > On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 17:02 +0530, ram wrote: >> On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 12:16 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > score *_SURBL 0 I dont want that since that will cause a lint fail incase the rules are removed later >>> No, it won't, i

Re: remove SURBL rules

Back on-list. On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 17:02 +0530, ram wrote: > On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 12:16 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > > > score *_SURBL 0 > > > > > > I dont want that since that will cause a lint fail incase the rules are > > > removed later > > > > No, it won't, it lints just fine. >

Re: remove SURBL rules

On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 12:27 +0530, ram wrote: > > score *_SURBL 0 > > I dont want that since that will cause a lint fail incase the rules are > removed later No, it won't, it lints just fine. # cat foo.cf score NO_SUCH_RULE 0 # spamassassin --lint; echo $? 0 Why do you claim it would? Testin

Re: remove SURBL rules

On 17.12.08 12:05, ram wrote: > I would like to remove the SURBL lookups from our servers since they are > no longer free (and their charges are unreasonable ) I think they dropped charges a bit, did you look now? > I would just put a 0.0 score in local.cf for all their rules , but I > guess wh

Re: remove SURBL rules

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008, Benny Pedersen wrote: On Ons, December 17, 2008 07:35, ram wrote: I would like to remove the SURBL lookups from our servers since they are no longer free (and their charges are unreasonable ) show links where this is stated or make a bug on it :) else: score *_SURBL 0

Re: remove SURBL rules

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008, ram wrote: I would like to remove the SURBL lookups from our servers since they are no longer free (and their charges are unreasonable ) I would just put a 0.0 score in local.cf for all their rules , but I guess when the rules are removed from the actual cf files by sa-upd

Re: remove SURBL rules

Hi! I would like to remove the SURBL lookups from our servers since they are no longer free (and their charges are unreasonable ) show links where this is stated or make a bug on it :) http://www.surbl.org/usage-policy.html So you have bigger message volume, this applies to many lists. S

Re: remove SURBL rules

On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 07:43 +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote: > On Ons, December 17, 2008 07:35, ram wrote: > > I would like to remove the SURBL lookups from our servers since they > > are no longer free (and their charges are unreasonable ) > > show links where this is stated or make a bug on it :) >

Re: remove SURBL rules

On Ons, December 17, 2008 07:35, ram wrote: > I would like to remove the SURBL lookups from our servers since they > are no longer free (and their charges are unreasonable ) show links where this is stated or make a bug on it :) else: score *_SURBL 0 -- Benny Pedersen Need more webspace ? htt

Re: remove spam before forwarding

Euroka wrote: Hi all, I have a postfix with a couple of virtual hosts and a /etc/postfix/virtual file with my users . some users prefer that mail from my postfix server mail.domain1.com gets forwarded to an exchange server at mail.domain2.com Now all users have a .procmailrc file in their home

Re: remove spam before forwarding

2008/3/18, McDonald, Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On Tue, 2008-03-18 at 12:33 +0100, Euroka wrote: > > > How can I remove all incoming spam directely instead of first > > processing it via procmail, so domain2 doesn't get all the spam > > traffic that arrived first at domain1? > > > Use a product

Re: remove spam before forwarding

On Tue, 2008-03-18 at 12:33 +0100, Euroka wrote: > How can I remove all incoming spam directely instead of first > processing it via procmail, so domain2 doesn't get all the spam > traffic that arrived first at domain2? Use a product designed for a forwarding MTA like amavisd-new. It will quara

Re: Remove local spamassassin folder

On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 08:55 -0600, Dean Clapper wrote: > How do I setup spamassassin not to automatically create > /home/user/.spamassassin folder. If I create a new email account it > automatically creates the folder. man spamd -x, --nouser-config Disable user (...) res

[OT] RE: remove email

> > > xou4 schrieb: > > >> Hello, > > >> I want to remove the mails on which a score above 30 Or for procmail (this rule is for 20, add or decrease \* as appropriate): :0 * ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* /dev/null

Re: remove email

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:00:52 +0100 Matthias Haegele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> confabulated: > Matthias Haegele schrieb: > > xou4 schrieb: > >> Hello, > >> I want to remove the mails on which a score above 30 > >> Thank you in advance for your help > > > > spamassassin "tags" messages whatever "filter"

Re: remove email

Matthias Haegele schrieb: xou4 schrieb: Hello, I want to remove the mails on which a score above 30 Thank you in advance for your help spamassassin "tags" messages whatever "filter" you use could do this ... Perhaps you want to use amavisd-new or procmail or ... (Using Postfix/amavisd-new/

Re: remove email

xou4 schrieb: Hello, I want to remove the mails on which a score above 30 Thank you in advance for your help spamassassin "tags" messages whatever "filter" you use could do this ... Xou -- Grüsse/Greetings MH Dont send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --

Re: remove email

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 06:49:25 -0700 (PDT) xou4 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> confabulated: > > Hello, > > I want to remove the mails on which a score above 30 > > Thank you in advance for your help > > Xou Your email server software (MTA) has to do that. SpamAssassin just scans what you feed it. It d

Re: remove known-postmaster entries from AWL?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote: > Hey all, > > The subject line says it all. I've got a lot of users complaining > about bounce spam, and while there's an 0.1 scoring "Vbounce" > ruleset, I notice that more often than not "postmaster" scores > somet

Re: [sa-list] Re: remove known-postmaster entries from AWL?

Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote: > >> You do realize the AWL isn't a whitelist, right? > > Why is it hitting, then? If it has the power to influence the score > hamward (on a non-real and possibly forged email address), I'd prefer > it not to apply. Well, first, back to the point. The AWL is an a

Re: [sa-list] Re: remove known-postmaster entries from AWL?

On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Matt Kettler wrote: Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote: Hey all, The subject line says it all. I've got a lot of users complaining about bounce spam, and while there's an 0.1 scoring "Vbounce" ruleset, I notice that more often than not "postmaster" scores sometimes a whopping

Re: remove known-postmaster entries from AWL?

Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote: > Hey all, > > The subject line says it all. I've got a lot of users complaining > about bounce spam, and while there's an 0.1 scoring "Vbounce" ruleset, > I notice that more often than not "postmaster" scores sometimes a > whopping .5, and at other times -17. Is

Re: Re: [OT] Re: REMOVE and Don't Send These Emails

Probably need a couple of extra wives to explain it to you ;-D On Thu, 18 May 2006 19:30:56 -0400, Rick Macdougall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Evan Platt wrote: >> On Thu, May 18, 2006 4:25 pm, Rick Macdougall wrote: >>> Our LDS Family ? >>> >>> Strange. >> >> LDS = Latter Day Saints (Mormons).

Re: [OT] Re: REMOVE and Don't Send These Emails

Evan Platt wrote: On Thu, May 18, 2006 4:25 pm, Rick Macdougall wrote: Our LDS Family ? Strange. LDS = Latter Day Saints (Mormons). Ja, I know what is is, I just found the url strange. *Shrug* but what do I know.

Re: [OT] Re: REMOVE and Don't Send These Emails

On Thu, May 18, 2006 4:25 pm, Rick Macdougall wrote: > Our LDS Family ? > > Strange. LDS = Latter Day Saints (Mormons).

[OT] Re: REMOVE and Don't Send These Emails

Matt Kettler wrote: Please cease and desist sending me automated backscatter in response to postings regarding spamassassin-talk list. Either unsubscribe yourself from the list, or stop generating backscatter. Further backscatter will be reported to spamcop as such. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote

Re: REMOVE and Don't Send These Emails

Please cease and desist sending me automated backscatter in response to postings regarding spamassassin-talk list. Either unsubscribe yourself from the list, or stop generating backscatter. Further backscatter will be reported to spamcop as such. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > You are emailing f

Re: Remove Me

On Tuesday, May 9th 2006 at 18:07 -0400, quoth Aaron Boyles: =>How do I take myself off this mailing list? => =>-Javin => From: "Dr. Bryan Bledsoe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "prehospitalcare List Member"? <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [prehospitalcare] How To Remove Yourself From The List Date: Sat,

Re: Remove Me

Aaron Boyles wrote: > How do I take myself off this mailing list? > > -Javin > Check the headers of any message on this list. They all have a "list-unsubscribe" header. This is the RFC 2369 standardized way for mailing lists to provide this information, so be sure to look for it elsewhere too.

Re: Remove Me

Aaron Boyles wrote: > How do I take myself off this mailing list? > > -Javin list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Quality Business Hosting & Colocation http:/

Re: Remove BigEvil :)

Michele hence for those using RDJ to update, you edit the version info, which *should* get emailed to a real person with the "I've upgrade these rules" message At least you've then informed as many people as possible the rule is going off-line.. -- Martin Hepworth Snr Systems Administrato

RE: Remove BigEvil :)

Martin Hepworth wrote: > Chris > > may I suggest you change BE at the top (revision section), so > it gives notice of BE's imminent death on 1 Dec (for example). > > Then repeat this every week so people might actually read the > update email from RDJ and do something about it! > > On 1 Dec remo

Re: Remove BigEvil :)

Chris may I suggest you change BE at the top (revision section), so it gives notice of BE's imminent death on 1 Dec (for example). Then repeat this every week so people might actually read the update email from RDJ and do something about it! On 1 Dec remove all the entries and merely have the c

Re: Remove BigEvil :)

Chris Santerre wrote: > Number of hits for the bigevil file in Oct: 109328 > > Um.I'm not updating it anymore! Haven't in quite a while. > > Tell your RDJ script to stop asking for updates :) You should probably put some innocuous error in that file that will cause anyone running --lint t