Op 4-mei-07, om 17:19 heeft Justin Mason het volgende geschreven:
Jason Bertoch [Electronet] writes:
Have the Botnet rules been absorbed into SA 3.2.0, or are the new
rules
compliamentary? Specifically, I'm looking at FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D and
FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB.
They're complementary (as f
Hi,
I've been upgrading several stable servers running 3.1.8 for months
without any issues to 3.1.20, and got a problem in one of them. When
trying to restart spamd, I get this:
@4000463ee4f622539324 [5532] error: check: no loaded plugin
implements 'check_main': cannot scan! at
/u
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 4:47 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Problem upgrading from 3.1.8 to 3.1.20, check.pm
>
>
> Hi,
>
>I've been upgrading several stable servers running 3.1.8
> for
Michael Scheidell wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 4:47 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Problem upgrading from 3.1.8 to 3.1.20, check.pm
Hi,
I've been upgrading several stable servers running 3.1.8
[Disclosure: I'm involved with the dnswl.org project]
SA 3.2.0 misses one rule to get the actual dnswl.org lookup rules working
(reported in http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5450,
targetted for resolution in 3.2.1).
In order to use dnswl.org lookups already today, add the fol
Ruben Cardenal wrote:
Michael Scheidell wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 07,
2007 4:47 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Problem upgrading from 3.1.8 to 3.1.20, check.pm
Hi,
I've been upgrading several stabl
Michael Scheidell wrote:
Ruben Cardenal wrote:
Michael Scheidell wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 07,
2007 4:47 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Problem upgrading from 3.1.8 to 3.1.20, check.pm
Hi,
I've be
At 01:46 PM 5.7.2007 +0200, Matthias Leisi wrote:
>[Disclosure: I'm involved with the dnswl.org project]
>
>SA 3.2.0 misses one rule to get the actual dnswl.org lookup rules working
>(reported in http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5450,
>targetted for resolution in 3.2.1).
>
>In
Jack L. Stone wrote:
> At 01:46 PM 5.7.2007 +0200, Matthias Leisi wrote:
>
>> [Disclosure: I'm involved with the dnswl.org project]
>>
>> SA 3.2.0 misses one rule to get the actual dnswl.org lookup rules working
>> (reported in http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5450,
>> targe
Well, it all depends on how do you run SA (as a content filter,
through AMAVIS, via procmail, etc). Via AMAVIS you could use the log
parser which MrC wrote, which works like a charm here. It could work
as a control, since it tell you which rules hitted harder, which ones
didn't, etc. SA cannot cop
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been upgrading several stable servers running 3.1.8 for months
> without any issues to 3.1.20, and got a problem in one of them. When
> trying to restart spamd, I get this:
>
> @4000463ee4f622539324 [5532] error: check: no loaded plugin
> implements '
I am trying to get all my spam forwarded to one box on my system. Seems easy
enough.
(Sendmail is my MTA)
Anyways, my optional flags in spamass milter look like this:
-b [EMAIL PROTECTED] -r 15
So all spam is being sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] which is working great!
The problem becomes when a s
> -Messaggio originale-
> Da: Luis Hernán Otegui [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Well, it all depends on how do you run SA (as a content filter,
> through AMAVIS, via procmail, etc). Via AMAVIS you could use the log
> parser which MrC wrote, which works like a charm here. It could work
> as
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jack L. Stone wrote:
> When I run manual test:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> host 2.0.0.127.list.dnswl.org
> ...I get
> 2.0.0.127.list.dnswl.org has address 127.0.10.0
> Not return of 127.0.0.2???
There was a doc error on http://www.dnswl.org/tech tell
Well, you could try asking the amavis list, tough. I think you could
actually tell amavis to copy the messages which hit a certain rule to
a certain directory, or to look for a specific tag by SA. But this is
getting kinda off-toopic, I think...
Regards,
Luix
2007/5/7, Giampaolo Tomassoni <[EM
I've been running 3.2.0 on our Mac Server for a few days now and it
seems to be working fairly well, I'm surprised (updating Mac Server
isn't straight forward). The exceptions are the following two
problems:
During sa-update:
[20781] info: rules: meta test HS_PHARMA_1 has dependency
'H
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Michael Scheidell wrote:
[SNIP]
There are a LOT of subtle changes... But for the brave, here is a
tarball.
cd /usr/ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin
rm -rf
Untar this there: http://www.secnap.com/downloads/sa320.tgz
Just an FYI followup. I have upgraded without any errors. I
> -Messaggio originale-
> Da: Luis Hernán Otegui [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Well, you could try asking the amavis list, tough. I think you could
> actually tell amavis to copy the messages which hit a certain rule to
> a certain directory, or to look for a specific tag by SA. But this i
I need a quickie on the AWL. It looks like some spam is getting assigned a
negative score because of an AWL rule(?). The messages are text and not too
spammy otherwise, but from a layman's perspective, definitely not something
that should be on a whitelist. I know how to remove from the white
AWL is not a whitelist as I think you are referring to it as. AWL is a
weighting that applies a +/- score to mail that it sees as spam or
ham from repeated learning of similar mail types. If AWL is routinely
assigning the wrong weight to your mail then I would delete the table
in your datab
Craig,
Thanks for the advise. Is there a way to view the contents of the AWL? How do
I remove the table?
Thanks,
Clay
>>> On 5/7/2007 at 1:28 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Craig Carriere
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
AWL is not a whitelist as I think you are referring to it as. AWL
Thanks for the advise. Is there a way to view the contents of the AWL? How
do I remove the table?
Thanks,
Clay
Clay,
I dunno about tables, yet
I have this in local.cf
use_auto_whitelist 0
- rh
--
Abba Communications
Spokane, WA
www.abbacomm.net
On Mon, 7 May 2007, Craig Carriere wrote:
> AWL is not a whitelist
...rats. We missed a perfect chance (in the 3.2 release) to rename
that bloody thing and save no end of FAQs...
:)
--
John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]FALaholic #11174
On Mon, 7 May 2007, Jack L. Stone wrote:
At 04:51 PM 5.7.2007 +, you wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Michael Scheidell wrote:
[SNIP]
There are a LOT of subtle changes... But for the brave, here is a
tarball.
cd /usr/ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin
rm -rf
Untar this there: http://www.secnap.co
> -Original Message-
> From: Duane Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:51 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: RE: ANNOUNCE: Apache SpamAssassin 3.2.0 available
>
> On Sat, 5 May 2007, Michael Scheidell wrote:
>
> [SNIP]
> > There are a LOT of s
Philip Prindeville wrote:
> I'm looking at the headers I just got from a Canadian
> ISP's autoresponder I guess the software is called
> "KANA". Anyone know who owns this? (Yes, "someone
> not very clueful", I know... let's be more specific than
> that...)
>
>
>> Date: sam., 05 mai 2007 1
>
> ...rats. We missed a perfect chance (in the 3.2 release) to rename
> that bloody thing and save no end of FAQs...
>
> :)
>
> --
> John Hardin
Might as well go and do it now, why wait?
--
Abba Communications
Spokane, WA
www.abbacomm.net
On Mon, 7 May 2007, Abba Communications - www.abbacomm.net wrote:
Thanks for the advise. Is there a way to view the contents of the AWL? How
do I remove the table?
Go into your source directory Mail-SpamAssassin-3.2.0/tools and look for
check_whitelist. This will dump the contents of
Perhaps you're looking for the -i option, especially in the form of
"-i 127.0.0.1"?
Or am I not understanding your situation?
On Mon, 7 May 2007, dougp23 wrote:
I am trying to get all my spam forwarded to one box on my system. Seems easy
enough.
(Sendmail is my MTA)
Anyways, my optional fla
Duane Hill writes:
> On Sat, 5 May 2007, Michael Scheidell wrote:
>
> [SNIP]
> > There are a LOT of subtle changes... But for the brave, here is a
> > tarball.
> > cd /usr/ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin
> > rm -rf
> >
> > Untar this there: http://www.secnap.com/downloads/sa320.tgz
>
> Just an F
According to:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/tags/spamassassin_release_3_2_0/Changes
- separate a signature verification from fetching a policy, which makes it
possible to avoid one DNS lookups (by not fetching a policy) for each
unverified message by setting score to 0 for al
On Mon, 7 May 2007, Justin Mason wrote:
Duane Hill writes:
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Michael Scheidell wrote:
[SNIP]
There are a LOT of subtle changes... But for the brave, here is a
tarball.
cd /usr/ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin
rm -rf
Untar this there: http://www.secnap.com/downloads/sa320.tg
The entire error line reads:
Malformed UTF-8 character (unexpected non-continuation byte 0x00, immediately
after start byte 0xce) in pattern match (m//)
at
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.002000/72_sare_bml_post25x_cf_sare_sa-update_dostech_net/20050602.cf,
rule SARE_OBFUMONEY1, line 1.
I saw t
rule SARE_OBFUMONEY1, line 1.
I saw the same thing earlier this weekend but passed it off to possibly
something I didn't have configured right.
No. Its a combination of a perl bug and a change in SA to allow rules in
other than the ascii character set.
Previous versions of SA had 'use bytes
On Monday 07 May 2007 8:51 pm, Loren Wilton wrote:
> > rule SARE_OBFUMONEY1, line 1.
> >
> > I saw the same thing earlier this weekend but passed it off to possibly
> > something I didn't have configured right.
>
> No. Its a combination of a perl bug and a change in SA to allow rules in
> other th
Chris wrote:
Thanks Loren, I doubt then that this accounts for the strange sa-update run I
had this morning which I've posted the cron output here:
http://mediasafe.embarq.com/chris1948/Hosted/saupdate0507.tar.bz2
I don't see anything strange at all in that output.
Yesterdays update was a
At 06:45 PM 5.7.2007 +, Duane Hill wrote:
>On Mon, 7 May 2007, Jack L. Stone wrote:
>
>> At 04:51 PM 5.7.2007 +, you wrote:
>>> On Sat, 5 May 2007, Michael Scheidell wrote:
>>>
>>> [SNIP]
There are a LOT of subtle changes... But for the brave, here is a
tarball.
cd /usr/ports
I'm trying to get SA to read user rules from MySQL. I've exhausted all
testing and have not found a way. I have spamd starting with the following
parameters:
--username=spamd --groupname=spamd --min-children=2 --max-children=8
--min-spare=4 --max-spare=6 --max-conn-per-child=120 --timeout
38 matches
Mail list logo
