jida...@jidanni.org a écrit :
> m> http://www.netoyen.net/sa/sa-update.sh.txt
> m> http://www.netoyen.net/sa/channel.conf
> They give 403 Forbidden.
should be fixed now. sorry for the annoyance.
m> http://www.netoyen.net/sa/sa-update.sh.txt
m> http://www.netoyen.net/sa/channel.conf
They give 403 Forbidden.
> >> ???AFAIK Justin is aware of this, and hopefully will have fixed it
> >> soon. :)
> On Wed, December 10, 2008 12:28, Justin Mason wrote:
> > this should be fixed now, I think...
On 15.12.08 03:12, Benny Pedersen wrote:
[...]
> [746] dbg: http: GET request,
> http://yerp.org/rules/stage/320726
> [746] dbg: generic: lint check of site pre files succeeded,
> continuing with channel updates
> [746] dbg: channel: no MIRRORED.BY file available
> [746] dbg: http: GET request, http://yerp.org/rules/MIRRORED.BY
> [746] dbg: channel: MIRRORED.BY file retrieved
> [746] dbg: channel: reading MIRROR
On Wed, December 10, 2008 12:28, Justin Mason wrote:
>> ???AFAIK Justin is aware of this, and hopefully will have fixed it
>> soon. :)
>
> this should be fixed now, I think...
[746] dbg: generic: lint check of site pre files succeeded,
continuing with channel updates
[746] dbg: channel: no MIRRO
On 12-Dec-2008, at 07:20, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
If
something doesn't work, please do at least think twice about the
command
that failed, *before* venting your broken syntax to the list.
It wasn't *MY* broken syntax, that's the whole point.
--
The other cats just think he's a tosser. -
On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 17:12 -0700, LuKreme wrote:
> On 11-Dec-2008, at 14:29, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> I read a hell of a lot of stuff about all this, and have been running
> SA since 2.mumble If you are a plug-n-play sysadmin, then no
> problem. If you are already well-versed in the vag
My god, let it go, please!
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
In article , LuKreme
writes
>The gpg installed on my FreeBSD does not have a man page (installed by
>ports for SA3.2.5, IIRC), just a --help which says the syntax is:
Logically you have security/gnupg installed which means...
%ls -l /usr/local/bin/gpg*
lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 4 Oct 15
On 11-Dec-2008, at 14:29, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
...or read the documentation.
I read a hell of a lot of stuff about all this, and have been running
SA since 2.mumble If you are a plug-n-play sysadmin, then no
problem. If you are already well-versed in the vagaries of gpg, then
fin
On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 22:29 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 13:32 -0700, LuKreme wrote:
> > Not at all, I KNOW where the gpg.key came from, because I downloaded
> > it. And it came from the same server as the rules are coming.
> > The KeyID is coming from who knows wh
On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 13:32 -0700, LuKreme wrote:
> > It's almost like "Just download this key file and you'll be fine. Don't
> > worry about where it came from, just put it in your keyring."
>
> Not at all, I KNOW where the gpg.key came from, because I downloaded
> it. And it came from the s
LuKreme wrote:
> On 11-Dec-2008, at 07:39, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> >
> > It's almost like "Just download this key file and you'll be fine.
> > Don't worry about where it came from, just put it in your keyring."
>
> Not at all, I KNOW where the gpg.key came from, because I downloaded
> it. And it c
On 11-Dec-2008, at 07:39, Bowie Bailey wrote:
LuKreme wrote:
On 10-Dec-2008, at 20:36, SM wrote:
it's a hexadecimal number which identifies the key.
And the source of that number is, evidently, a complete mystery.
That's my point. I've seen lots of instructions like this:
# wget http://som
RobertH wrote on Wed, 10 Dec 2008 17:49:28 -0800:
> what ones did you keep? if you recall, any particular reason why?
Hm, I checked and it seems I was wrong, partly. I still have them in the
channels.txt for my sa-update. I removed them on some other machines
partly because of memory constraint
Mouss wrote on Wed, 10 Dec 2008 10:34:21 +0100:
> 90_2tld.cf.sare.sa-update.dostech.net
Thanks, for the tip, I wasn't aware of it. As I understand it helps URIBL
to score on subdomains that it otherwise wouldn't check at all?
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Inter
At 22:19 10-12-2008, LuKreme wrote:
I ssh to the server and then I sudo su (so I am sure I have discarded
my own login environment, I do not normally do this)
mail# gpg --list-keys /etc/mail/spamassassin/sa-update-keys/pubring.gpg
gpg: error reading key: No public key
gpg --no-default-keyring
y>
Reply-To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote on Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:48:34 +0100:
> Hmm, mine doesn't. :)
My package says gnupg-1.4.5-13.
> Instead that option's desc starts with "List all
> keys from the public keyrings, or just the keys given on the command
> line".
Y
LuKreme wrote:
> On 10-Dec-2008, at 20:36, SM wrote:
> >
> > it's a hexadecimal number which identifies the key.
>
> And the source of that number is, evidently, a complete mystery.
> That's my point. I've seen lots of instructions like this:
>
> # wget http://somesite.tld/somepath/GPG.KEY
> #
On Wed, 10 Dec 2008, LuKreme wrote:
I'm still unclear on how the --gpgkey makes it more secure. If the file
is signed, the signature is checked against the public key that I have
in pubring.gpg. What does the gpgkey do?
It indicates which key to use to check the signature.
--
John Hardin
> > mail# gpg --list-keys /etc/mail/spamassassin/sa-update-keys/pubring.gpg
> > gpg: error reading key: No public key
And another doc you didn't read before asking here, LuKreme...
> I get the same, and without the path to a file I get the keys from the
> global keyring which are non for SA. man
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
LuKreme wrote on Wed, 10 Dec 2008 23:19:25 -0700:
> mail# gpg --list-keys /etc/mail/spamassassin/sa-update-keys/pubring.gpg
> gpg: error reading key: No public key
I get the same, and without the path to a file I get the keys from the
g
LuKreme wrote:
> I read the man page, where there is no mention of how to obtain this
> number. In fact, I read many posts, and many webpages and have still not
> found that information. I've seen the IDs in others posts, sure, but
> where do they originate?
>
> Even searching the wiki (which
On 10-Dec-2008, at 22:18, SM wrote:
At 20:39 10-12-2008, LuKreme wrote:
And the source of that number is, evidently, a complete mystery.
That's my point. I've seen lots of instructions like this:
# wget http://somesite.tld/somepath/GPG.KEY
# sudo sa-update --import GPG.KEY
# sudo sa-update --g
At 20:39 10-12-2008, LuKreme wrote:
And the source of that number is, evidently, a complete mystery.
That's my point. I've seen lots of instructions like this:
# wget http://somesite.tld/somepath/GPG.KEY
# sudo sa-update --import GPG.KEY
# sudo sa-update --gpgkey 0E28B3DC --channel uber.rule.so
On 10-Dec-2008, at 20:36, SM wrote:
At 13:51 10-12-2008, LuKreme wrote:
I read the man page, where there is no mention of how to obtain this
number. In fact, I read many posts, and many webpages and have still
not found that information. I've seen the IDs in others posts, sure,
but where do the
At 13:51 10-12-2008, LuKreme wrote:
I read the man page, where there is no mention of how to obtain this
number. In fact, I read many posts, and many webpages and have still
not found that information. I've seen the IDs in others posts, sure,
but where do they originate?
sa-update uses GPG (GN
>
> Right. I removed most if not all of the SARE rules on most
> machines some months ago with no ill effects.
>
> Kai
what ones did you keep? if you recall, any particular reason why?
- rh
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
LuKreme wrote on Wed, 10 Dec 2008 14:51:47 -0700:
> I read the man page, where there is no mention of how to obtain this
> number. In fact, I read many posts, and many webpages and have still
> not found that information. I've seen t
LuKreme a écrit :
> On 10-Dec-2008, at 01:31, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>> Duane Hill wrote on Wed, 10 Dec 2008 06:53:39 + (UTC):
>>> Do a search for 'sought' on the SA wiki page
>>
>> and read the documentation on sa-update before you ask again ;-)
>
> I read the man page, where there is no mention
On 10-Dec-2008, at 01:31, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Duane Hill wrote on Wed, 10 Dec 2008 06:53:39 + (UTC):
Do a search for 'sought' on the SA wiki page
and read the documentation on sa-update before you ask again ;-)
I read the man page, where there is no mention of how to obtain this
number
John Horne a écrit :
> On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 22:54 -0700, LuKreme wrote:
>> On 9-Dec-2008, at 17:09, John Horne wrote:
>>> Try:
>>>
>>>sa-update --gpgkey 6C6191E3 --channel sought.rules.yerp.org
>> Ok, that gives me no error (where did you find/get the 6C6191E3?). It
>> sits for about 20-30 s
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Karsten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=E4ckelmann?= writes:
> > On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 20:00 -0600, Chris wrote:
> > > Has anyone seen any updates to the sought rules lately? It seems
> > > like it's been about 4 or 5 days now since I've seen any via
> > > sa-update.
> >
> > I believ
Justin Mason wrote:
Karsten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=E4ckelmann?= writes:
On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 20:00 -0600, Chris wrote:
Has anyone seen any updates to the sought rules lately? It seems like it's
been about 4 or 5 days now since I've seen any via sa-update.
I believe this is due to the recent SSL ce
Karsten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=E4ckelmann?= writes:
> On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 20:00 -0600, Chris wrote:
> > Has anyone seen any updates to the sought rules lately? It seems like it's
> > been about 4 or 5 days now since I've seen any via sa-update.
>
> I believe this is due to the recent SSL cert updat
On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 22:54 -0700, LuKreme wrote:
> On 9-Dec-2008, at 17:09, John Horne wrote:
> > Try:
> >
> >sa-update --gpgkey 6C6191E3 --channel sought.rules.yerp.org
>
> Ok, that gives me no error (where did you find/get the 6C6191E3?). It
> sits for about 20-30 seconds and then I get a
Kai Schaetzl a écrit :
> LuKreme wrote on Tue, 9 Dec 2008 16:50:34 -0700:
>
>> Geez there's
>> a lot of them... and they look like they are very old, with last
>> updated dates in 2005-2006 and none newer than Aug 2007.
>
> Right. I removed most if not all of the SARE rules on most machines s
LuKreme wrote on Tue, 9 Dec 2008 16:50:34 -0700:
> Geez there's
> a lot of them... and they look like they are very old, with last
> updated dates in 2005-2006 and none newer than Aug 2007.
Right. I removed most if not all of the SARE rules on most machines some
months ago with no ill effect
Duane Hill wrote on Wed, 10 Dec 2008 06:53:39 + (UTC):
> Do a search for 'sought' on the SA wiki page
and read the documentation on sa-update before you ask again ;-)
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
On Tue, 9 Dec 2008, LuKreme wrote:
(where did you find/get the 6C6191E3?).
Not too hard:
Do a search for 'sought' on the SA wiki page (which is linked off of
http://spamassassin.apache.org/):
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/
The very first link provided this:
http://wiki.apac
On 9-Dec-2008, at 17:09, John Horne wrote:
Try:
sa-update --gpgkey 6C6191E3 --channel sought.rules.yerp.org
Ok, that gives me no error (where did you find/get the 6C6191E3?). It
sits for about 20-30 seconds and then I get a prompt back. But as far
as I can tell, nothing has changed. T
On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 16:50 -0700, LuKreme wrote:
> On 9-Dec-2008, at 12:58, Bill Landry wrote:
> > Both the official SA rules and 3rd party rules can be updated via
> > sa-update. For information and instructions, see:
> >
> > http://daryl.dostech.ca/sa-update/sare/sare-sa-update-howto.txt
>
> A
On 9-Dec-2008, at 12:58, Bill Landry wrote:
Both the official SA rules and 3rd party rules can be updated via
sa-update. For information and instructions, see:
http://daryl.dostech.ca/sa-update/sare/sare-sa-update-howto.txt
Ah yes, I remember a lot of those from the days run rjd. Geez there'
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008, Chris wrote:
Has anyone seen any updates to the sought rules lately? It seems like it's
been about 4 or 5 days now since I've seen any via sa-update.
Ditto here.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] $ ll /var/lib/spamassassin/3.001008/sought_rules_yerp_org
total 320
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root
On 9-Dec-2008, at 12:48, LuKreme wrote:
I'm thtinking the old rules like 70_sc_top200.cf etc should all be
removed?
Just to be clear, all I have currently active is:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel3278 Dec 9 12:30 dkim.cf
-rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel1749 Dec 7 17:08 init.pre
drwx-- 2 ro
LuKreme wrote:
> On 9-Dec-2008, at 08:15, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>> On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 08:51 +, Nigel Frankcom wrote:
>>> I haven't seen an update from sa-update in months. What version is
>>> current?
>>
>> Nigel, Chris wasn't talking about the stock rule-set, but the
>> third-party JM_
On 9-Dec-2008, at 08:15, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 08:51 +, Nigel Frankcom wrote:
I haven't seen an update from sa-update in months. What version is
current?
Nigel, Chris wasn't talking about the stock rule-set, but the
third-party JM_SOUGHT rules. The latter usually
On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 08:51 +, Nigel Frankcom wrote:
> I haven't seen an update from sa-update in months. What version is
> current?
Nigel, Chris wasn't talking about the stock rule-set, but the
third-party JM_SOUGHT rules. The latter usually are updated multiple
times a day, while the stock r
On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 20:00 -0600, Chris wrote:
> Has anyone seen any updates to the sought rules lately? It seems like it's
> been about 4 or 5 days now since I've seen any via sa-update.
I believe this is due to the recent SSL cert update for ASF svn. Changed
without a heads up in advance... :(
the current Sought version : # UPDATE version 320722979
and spamassassin : # UPDATE version 709395
I haven't seen an update from sa-update in months. What version is
current?
I have dbg: dns: 5.2.3.updates.spamassassin.org => 709395, parsed as
709395 showing here.
This even after a dns cras
I haven't seen an update from sa-update in months. What version is
current?
I have dbg: dns: 5.2.3.updates.spamassassin.org => 709395, parsed as
709395 showing here.
This even after a dns crash and replace.
Nigel
On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 09:39:11 +0100, Leveau Stanislas
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
Hi
I have the same "problem"
regards
Stan
Has anyone seen any updates to the sought rules lately? It seems like it's
been about 4 or 5 days now since I've seen any via sa-update.
--
Chris
KeyID 0xE372A7DA98E6705C
Has anyone seen any updates to the sought rules lately? It seems like it's
been about 4 or 5 days now since I've seen any via sa-update.
--
Chris
KeyID 0xE372A7DA98E6705C
pgpqvBQu4d9qG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
53 matches
Mail list logo
