Ramprasad wrote:
> Hi,
>I want to write a personal rule to match recipients of a particular
> domain
> The rule I am using now is
>
> header __TO_DOMAIN_NETToCc =~ /[EMAIL PROTECTED]/i
>
> But the above rule would match "@domain.net" as well as
> "@domain.net.in"
> Which is the best way
Philip Prindeville wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I just joined the list, and I do a little peripheral work with
> Mimedefang and Thunderbird, sendmail, etc.
>
> In working with MdF, the following issue came up. We're running
> SpamAssassin 3.0.4, Mimedefang 2.55, Perl 5.8.5, and Sendmail
> 8.13.1... all on Red
Jeff Koch wrote:
>
> I'm getting this spamd error in the maillogs and I have AWL turned
> off. We're also using vpopmail and have the following spamd starting
> parameters:
>
> SPAMDOPTIONS="-d -c -m5 -H -q -u vpopmail"
>
> Can anyone tell me what we're doing wrong?
>
>
> Feb 4 02:33:24 libra spam
Philip Prindeville wrote:
Philip will get no further help from me until he modifies his ACLs.
Final-Recipient: rfc822; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.0 MAIL FROM: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 550 REPLY:
550_5.0.0_This_provider_is_blacklisted
Sorry, I don't help people who block off ent
SA 3.0.2 on FC3. I added a whitelist_from entry for the local domain
in local.cf and understood it would add -100 to the score. The problem
is performance of mantis, our bugtracker, which sends email for each
action. Turns out SA is still scanning each mail where I really wanted
it to just ignore i
Eric Carlson wrote:
> SA 3.0.2 on FC3. I added a whitelist_from entry for the local domain
> in local.cf and understood it would add -100 to the score. The problem
> is performance of mantis, our bugtracker, which sends email for each
> action. Turns out SA is still scanning each mail where I reall
Matt Kettler a écrit :
> Ramprasad wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>> I want to write a personal rule to match recipients of a particular
>>domain
>>The rule I am using now is
>>
>> header __TO_DOMAIN_NETToCc =~ /[EMAIL PROTECTED]/i
>>
>>But the above rule would match "@domain.net" as well as
>>"@domain.ne
Larry Starr a écrit :
> Lately I have seen a number of SPAM messages with a sender in the form of:
> <""@somedomain.whatever>
>
sender envelope or From header? Can you send me a copy?
> for example: <""@ipyub.com>
>
> I'm not sure if this is intentional or simply broken ratware.
I guess
Michael Einem wrote:
Hello All,
I've been using SA since 2.3 with no problems whatsoever. First on a
Debian 3 and since 3.0 on FreeBSD 4.10.
I was trying to upgrade to 3.10 using CPAN and run into following problem:
The make went ok but testing failed several tests and aborted.
3.00 runs on th
Has anyone noticed that the SA scores for the "McDONALDS Customer #"
spam are getting lower and lower? Another .4 reduction and they'll
pass SA here!
--
Cheers, Gene
People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should add the word
'online' between the 'verizon', and the dot which bypasse
From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Has anyone noticed that the SA scores for the "McDONALDS Customer #"
spam are getting lower and lower? Another .4 reduction and they'll
pass SA here!
Out of curiosity check your wallet and see what your McDonalds Customer
number on your discount card
Craploads... They are scoring .2 under my threshold. But I haven't seen
any decrease in the level. I was meaning to train these into bayes...
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.8 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_SBL,URIBL_SBL
autolearn=no version=3.1.0
> -Original Message-
jdow wrote:
> From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Has anyone noticed that the SA scores for the "McDONALDS Customer #"
>> spam are getting lower and lower? Another .4 reduction and they'll
>> pass SA here!
>
> Out of curiosity check your wallet and see what your McDonalds Customer
> numb
On Saturday 04 February 2006 19:53, jdow wrote:
>From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Has anyone noticed that the SA scores for the "McDONALDS Customer #"
>> spam are getting lower and lower? Another .4 reduction and they'll
>> pass SA here!
>
>Out of curiosity check your wallet and see w
I'm using spamassassin with bayes filtering, nightly I use sa-learn to go
though the folders I have, learning spam and learning ham. This has gone
on for about 6 weeks now with me moving the uncaught spam messages that
are in my inbox into the spam folder. I know it has well over 200 messages
as th
Brian S. Meehan wrote:
> My question is, why is it only catching 49% of spam
> messages? I have the required # set to 4.0
That's pretty low.. Some questions:
1) What version of SA are you using?
2) can you post an X-Spam-Status header from one of your spams that
didn't get caught?
> Are there
16 matches
Mail list logo
