On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 10:08:36 -0400
Thierry Lavallee wrote:
> Hi, First post. :)
>
> Is there any way to report on ALL the threshold settings configured
> across ALL users on the server?
>
> I would like to see if users have overridden the default values. And
> I would like to make sure I don't
Thierry Lavallee wrote:
Hi, First post. :)
Is there any way to report on ALL the threshold settings configured
across ALL users on the server?
That depends a lot on how SA is integrated and what you mean by a "user".
For the SA cluster at work, I'd do
SELECT * FROM userpref WHERE preferen
On 2018-02-21 (06:50 MST), David Jones wrote:
>
> I think it's best if we all report to Spamcop first to concentrate all of
> that information into a single database which increases our effectiveness.
> Then if you want to report directly to the platform/sender's abuse contact,
> that is good
On 02/21/2018 07:35 AM, Karol Augustin wrote:
On 2018-02-21 12:38, @lbutlr wrote:
On 2018-02-21 (05:37 MST), Tom Hendrikx wrote:
How about: https://aws.amazon.com/forms/report-abuse
Isn't amazon SES separate from amazon AWS?
It's not. SES is just a service within Amazon AWS.
k.
If yo
On 2018-02-21 12:38, @lbutlr wrote:
> On 2018-02-21 (05:37 MST), Tom Hendrikx wrote:
>>
>> How about: https://aws.amazon.com/forms/report-abuse
>
>
> Isn't amazon SES separate from amazon AWS?
It's not. SES is just a service within Amazon AWS.
k.
--
Karol Augustin
ka...@augustin.pl
http://ka
On 2018-02-21 (05:37 MST), Tom Hendrikx wrote:
>
> How about: https://aws.amazon.com/forms/report-abuse
Isn't amazon SES separate from amazon AWS?
--
Nothing gold can stay -- Robert Frost Stay gold -- Johnny Cade
On 21-02-18 13:34, @lbutlr wrote:
> I've been trying to find a way to report a spammer to Amazon SES (Simple
> Email Service), but I haven't found anywhere to report this spam.
>
> (SA is tagging the messages, but I'm tired of Amazon allowing this company to
> continue doing this).
>
> X-Spam-S
On Tue, 21 Jul 2015 21:31:57 -0400
Bill Shirley wrote:
> I'm looking into modifying my spam processing script so it will
> report spam to Razor. From the Spamassassin Wiki:
> https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ReportingSpam I should use:
> spamassassin -r < message.txt
> It states "The mes
On 21.07.15 21:31, Bill Shirley wrote:
I'm looking into modifying my spam processing script so it will report spam to
Razor.
IIRC Razor says it should only be fed up manually (FYI)
From the Spamassassin Wiki: https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ReportingSpam
I should use:
spamassass
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012, Eric Krona wrote:
We have a few users who get a lot of emails asking them to report their
webmail usage, often linking to a google spreadsheet. They slip passed
spamassassing, likely because they are translated to swedish, but the mail is
clearly spam.
Is anyone else seei
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 18:35:27 -0500
"David F. Skoll" wrote:
> > Or a script, similar to their
> > https://aper.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/aper/addresses2spamassassin.pl
> Ah, I didn't know they had that! And also wouldn't have guessed
> it does the links too; thanks.
Um. It doesn't do the lin
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 17:42:57 -0500
dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> Or a script, similar to their
> https://aper.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/aper/addresses2spamassassin.pl
> which grabs
> https://aper.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/aper/phishing_links and
> converts it to SA rules.
Ah, I didn't know
On 12/04, David F. Skoll wrote:
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/aper/
>
> Their phishing_links file did have the URL you reported in it:
But did it contain that url at the time he received the email? That seems
to be a very important question with these things.
> So all some kind soul needs t
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 22:37:44 +0100
Eric Krona wrote:
> We have a few users who get a lot of emails asking them to report
> their webmail usage, often linking to a google spreadsheet. They slip
> passed spamassassing, likely because they are translated to swedish,
> but the mail is clearly spam.
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012, Eric Krona wrote:
We have a few users who get a lot of emails asking them to report their
webmail usage, often linking to a google spreadsheet. They slip passed
spamassassing, likely because they are translated to swedish, but the mail is
clearly spam.
Is anyone else seei
On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 19:08 +0300, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
> Well. SpamAssassin does not have a Quarantine. Something in your
> system has, and that is what is calling the SpamAssassin.
>
I already told him that simscan is doing the quarantining. Thats
definite.
I'm also 98% certain that simscan
> Hello
>
> if I restarted the spamd
>
You need more words when communicating ;)
Does this mean the report still does not show up, even if you restarted SA
after the setting?
Well. SpamAssassin does not have a Quarantine. Something in your system has,
and that is what is calling the SpamAssa
Hello
if I restarted the spamd
greetings
> From: ja...@iki.fi
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Report in header of SPAM emails
> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:58:58 +0300
>
> > dears Srs,
> >
> >
> > I have added the option repor
> dears Srs,
>
>
> I have added the option report_safe 1, but the mail
> deposited in the quarantine folder
> not have any attached and SA report
>
> Do not use the amavis, if not the simscan
>
Did you restart Spamd after the change?
dears Srs,
I have added the option report_safe 1, but the mail deposited in the quarantine
folder
not have any attached and SA report
Do not use the amavis, if not the simscan
thanks
Luis Campo
Do not use the amavis, if not the simscan
> Subject: Re: Report in header
On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 22:19 +0300, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
> > I was referring to the following:
> >
> > I have found that emails that have been filtered by SPAM
> > and have been placed in the Quarantine folder in the
> > header are not report of SpamAssassin.
> >
> > I want to know about the
> I was referring to the following:
>
> I have found that emails that have been filtered by SPAM
> and have been placed in the Quarantine folder in the
> header are not report of SpamAssassin.
>
> I want to know about the rules and scores assigned by
> SpamAssassin to those e-mails filtered.
>
Luis
> From: ja...@iki.fi
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Report in header of SPAM emails
> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 21:54:11 +0300
>
>
> > As configure SA to emails that have been submitted to the
> > QUARANTINE directory containing the report SA in
> As configure SA to emails that have been submitted to the
> QUARANTINE directory containing the report SA in the
> header.
>
> Huh?
Language barrier.
Maybe he sees now the spam going to quarantine folder by amavisd-new or similar
(do they do that to spam too, I don't know), and wants that
As configure SA to emails that have been submitted to the QUARANTINE
directory containing the report SA in the header.
Huh?
--
Dan Schaefer
Web Developer/Systems Analyst
Performance Administration Corp.
to
come from your MTA. SA has nothing to do with redirecting messages.
-Original Message-
From: Duane Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:15 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Report Safe
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Denise Ricerra wrote:
Hi!
S
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Denise Ricerra wrote:
Hi!
Sorry I am a newbie here at spam assassin. I just have a question, when I set
the report safe to ?1? the message gets altered,
even for the important message being tagged as SPAM. How do I get the original
message. Is there some sort of directory
Valentin. wrote:
In old version:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on ...
In new version:
/usr/bin/spamc
How to print report after all Received .
It breaks DKIM to do that, so this is a very intentional change that is
not readily reversed. If you really wan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand your point.
I run a Mac. I don't care for _any_ .exes period.
You could use your MTA to do a light content filtering, so it will
reject mail with .exe atachment at MTA level.
Try postfix.
--beast
2. the check isn't thorough enough because it doesn't consider
other content-types whereby people hide executable attachments.
Suggestion: you know the line in the plugin that is only checking the two
content types. You know the other content types you want to check.
Change the line in the
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Robert Nicholson wrote:
> You are failing to understand my point.
>
> To me any message that has a .exe attachment is spam.
I understand you completely. You have internalized "bad email ==
spam". There are more nuances than that - bulk unsolicited commercial
solicitations an
You are failing to understand my point.
To me any message that has a .exe attachment is spam. That's just how
I work because I'm on a Mac therefore I'd like to use
check_microsoft_executable who's job it is to bump up the score if
there's an executable attachment. The problem right now is t
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So in summary...
>
> SPAM is not always the same for everybody.
Sure it is. Spam (please don't capitalize the entire word - Hormel
gets annoyed) is Unsolicited Bulk Email.
> In my case anything with .exe is SPAM because nobody will send me a .exe
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I don't understand your point.
Spamassassin is a tool to determine the spamminess of a message, not
to check whether attachments to that message pose security risks.
> I run a Mac. I don't care for _any_ .exes period.
Fine. Your site email policy,
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 01:59:59PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> therefore I'm loading the antivirus plugin in order to make use of
> check_microsoft_executable rule. However that rule doesn't fire
> if the attacker is disguising the .exe with a non sensical content type
> primarily because the
So in summary...
SPAM is not always the same for everybody.
In my case anything with .exe is SPAM because nobody will send me a .exe
So I want the ability to make use of SA's configurability to learn what is SPAM
for me.
I don't call that a virus checker.
-
I really don't understand why you bring this up.
I do not want SA to check the .exe. I just want the rule to fire
so that it goes over my SPAM threshold when an .exe is attached.
right now the rule does not fire unless the attachment had a correspondily
correct content-type. In my case it does not
I don't understand your point.
I run a Mac. I don't care for _any_ .exes period.
therefore I'm loading the antivirus plugin in order to make use of
check_microsoft_executable rule. However that rule doesn't fire
if the attacker is disguising the .exe with a non sensical content type
primarily bec
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Robert Nicholson wrote:
> Any plans to change this? It's obviously an area where the spammer
> has found a way to work around the rule.
SA is not an antivirus tool, and an attached executable is not spam,
it is a security attack.
If you're not willing to run a traditional vi
This is why the rule doesn't trigger
I see ... so the reason this gets thru is the following.
foreach my $p ($pms->{msg}->find_parts(qr/^(application|text)\b/)) {
... just looking for application|text is being too kind
that needs to be more broad in this case.
I'd be for checking any attachme
Could it be because the use the following Content Type?
Content-Type: audio/x-wav; name="hwrs.exe"
disguising a .exe as a wav?
On Aug 13, 2006, at 5:17 PM, jdow wrote:
SpamAssassin is not an anti-virus tool.
{^_^}
- Original Message - From: "Robert Nicholson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
A
SpamAssassin is not an anti-virus tool.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Nicholson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Are you saying that 25_antivirus.cf doesn't have MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE
in 3.11?
On Aug 13, 2006, at 3:10 PM, Loren Wilton wrote:
Because MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE didn't hit o
Do I have to specifically enable that plugin? I have that installed.On Aug 13, 2006, at 3:22 PM, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight.ie wrote: Accepting to folder lists/unix/spamassassin-usersFrom: "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight.ie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Date: August 13, 2006 3:22:04 PM CDTTo: Robert Nicho
Robert Nicholson wrote:
> Are you saying that 25_antivirus.cf doesn't have MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE in
> 3.11?
>
That requires an extra plugin from what I can see:
# Requires the Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::AntiVirus plugin be loaded.
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Quality Business Ho
Are you saying that 25_antivirus.cf doesn't have MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE in 3.11?On Aug 13, 2006, at 3:10 PM, Loren Wilton wrote:Because MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE didn't hit on that message? Because MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE was a 2.x rule that was deleted in 3.0 and you are runing 3.1.1? Loren- Ori
Because MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE didn't hit on that message?
Because MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE was a 2.x rule that was deleted in 3.0 and you
are runing 3.1.1?
Loren
- Original Message -
From:
Robert
Nicholson
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Sunday, Augus
Noc Phibee wrote:
> Hi
>
> a small question :
>
> Do you know if they have a utility for create a entry into mrtg
> for count spamassassin result ?
>
> For exemple: Per day:
>Email received
>Email tagged by spamassassin
>Email with Virus
>
...you mean like qs2mrtg that's in the ./contri
Noc Phibee wrote:
> Hi
>
> a small question :
>
> Do you know if they have a utility for create a entry into mrtg
> for count spamassassin result ?
you might want to use munin instead of mrtg, it comes with spamassassin
monitoring
preconfigured... and it does other useful monitors as well.
bye
Christoph Petersen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've noticed a strange behaviour with SA 3.1 running on my debian machine.
> Before reboot every spamreport was on german. After reboot it was in
> english. How could I say spamassassin always to use the german report not
> the english one?
>
check out the sett
On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 16:55 +0100, Matthew Newton wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 02:06:11PM +0100, Ron McKeating wrote:
> > Is it possible to have a standard setting that does not put a full
> > report in the header for normal users, but does for one or 2 selected
> > users?
>
> If it is exiscan
On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 02:06:11PM +0100, Ron McKeating wrote:
> Is it possible to have a standard setting that does not put a full
> report in the header for normal users, but does for one or 2 selected
> users?
If it is exiscan you are currently using, then I guess you currently
have something l
On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 18:51 +0530, Rakesh wrote:
> Ron McKeating wrote:
>
> >Is it possible to have a standard setting that does not put a full
> >report in the header for normal users, but does for one or 2 selected
> >users?
> >
> >Ron
> >
> >
> >
> Are you directly using Spamc or using Amavis
Ron McKeating wrote:
Is it possible to have a standard setting that does not put a full
report in the header for normal users, but does for one or 2 selected
users?
Ron
Are you directly using Spamc or using Amavis or MailScanner or something
else as a wrapper. If you are using MailScanner
Lionel
MS 4.23 is very old - best to upgrade, latest stable version is 4.33.
Also best to ask this on the MS-users list as it's not a general SA
question...I'l see you there :-)
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
Lionel David wrote:
Hello,
I've
Hi Jack,
I think you can setup so-called "public" spam and ham (not-spam) imap folders
where all users can drop incorrectly tagged mail. Then you run a cron job
that gets SA to learn from these folders.
There was a guide on how to do exactly this on the SA wiki pages, I seem to
recall. Someone
55 matches
Mail list logo
