Anders,
> got a problem with SA from qmail auto-reply mail.
> The users got a full mbox and thats makes SA to timeout when checking the
> mail.
>
> Apr 7 14:16:50 spam.jll.se /usr/local/sbin/amavisd[27353]: (27353-02-63)
> LMTP:[127.0.0.1]:10024
> /var/amavis/amavis_temp/amavis-20090407T141038-27
On 8-Apr-2009, at 04:04, Mark Martinec wrote:
set it to something like:
$sa_mail_body_size_limit = 420*1024;
Isn't the limit still 256K unless overridden?
--
*** Word_of_God was kicked from #christian by SageRider (Please
don't Swear)
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 11:36 +0200, Anders Larsson wrote:
> got a problem with SA from qmail auto-reply mail.
> The users got a full mbox and thats makes SA to timeout when checking the
> mail.
I don't think it does. SA doesn't know about the full mbox, or where the
mail will end for that matter. S
On Wednesday 08 April 2009 12:40:26 Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 04:29 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> > On 8-Apr-2009, at 04:04, Mark Martinec wrote:
> > > set it to something like:
> > > $sa_mail_body_size_limit = 420*1024;
> >
> > Isn't the limit still 256K unless overridden?
>
> I
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 04:29 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 8-Apr-2009, at 04:04, Mark Martinec wrote:
> > set it to something like:
> > $sa_mail_body_size_limit = 420*1024;
>
> Isn't the limit still 256K unless overridden?
Is that an Amavis specific question?
Neither spamassassin, nor spamd have any
-Original Message-
From: Michael Hutchinson [mailto:mhutchin...@manux.co.nz]
Sent: woensdag 8 april 2009 5:46
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: 20_dnsbl_tests.cf
> > Upgrade to 3.2.x.
>
> > Seriously, 3.1.7 is vastly to old to be very effective, it was
> > released over 2 ye
Hi!
got a problem with SA from qmail auto-reply mail.
The users got a full mbox and thats makes SA to timeout when checking the
mail.
any hints ? whats wrong in the drugs.cf rule that cause this
Apr 7 14:16:50 spam.jll.se /usr/local/sbin/amavisd[27353]: (27353-02-63)
LMTP:[127.0.0.1]:10024 /va
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Michael Hutchinson wrote:
MailServer:~/spamassassin# spamassassin -D dns -t
You might want to fire up CPAN and upgrade Net::DNS.
[choke]. The last time I used CPAN for upgrading anything on this box,
it broke Spamassassin rather badly and I had to spend several hours
re
Amavisd-new with clamav-daemon and SaneSecurity is blazing fast.
2/3 of my spam seems to get caught by SaneSecurity, only the surviving 1/3 of
them gets nailed by SpamAssassin (called via spamc in maildroprc, not amavisd).
SaneSecurity is good. No false positives so far.
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:48 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, John Hardin wrote:
>> > How fast are non-SA DNS queries on that box? If they take ten seconds to
>> > return an answer, SA is not the culprit.
>
> On 01.04.09 17:53, alexus wrote:
>> without dns they
since i do not know, how effective is it to train on snowshoe spam?
under what conditions is it good idea?
always?
under what conditions is it not a good idea?
thanks in advance...
- rh
I do run spamd as a spamd user with a flag --vpopmail
$ ~vpopmail/bin/vuserinfo postmas...@xxx.xxx
Error: unable to setuid
$
I even tried with following, still same thing
$ chmod u+s vuserinfo
$ ls -ld ~vpopmail/bin/vuserinfo
-rws--x--x 1 vpopmail vchkpw 225377 Mar 25 01:15 /home/vpopmail
Hello,
our customrer reported being listed in SpamRats blacklist.
I would accept this if they were spamming, however it means that SpamRats
have braindead method to "detect" "dynamic" IP addresses and requirements
for removing them.
http://www.linuxmagic.com/best_practices/check_ip_reverse_dns.h
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:48 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, John Hardin wrote:
> >> > How fast are non-SA DNS queries on that box? If they take ten seconds to
> >> > return an answer, SA is not the culprit.
> >
> > On 01.04.09 17:53, alexus wrote:
> >> w
is this the best, most proper way to check for an inbound email address to
make sure that inbound emails are able to skip around the rule when
evaluated by SA in any way
header TO_USERNAME TO =~ /userna...@example.tld/i
score TO_USERNAME 0.1
:-)
what we want to do
> Subject: rules for specific inbound email address
>
> is this the best, most proper way to check for an inbound
> email address to make sure that inbound emails are able to
> skip around the rule when evaluated by SA in any way
>
> header TO_USERNAME TO =~ /userna...@example.tl
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:48 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>> wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, John Hardin wrote:
>> >> > How fast are non-SA DNS queries on that box? If they take ten seconds to
>> >> > return an answer, S
Matus,
Dropping mail outright because you can't reverse-resolve the mail server
is bad, of course. And it /will/ drop messages from legitimate mail
servers, especially those on private networks behind mail proxies as
many older exchange installations are configured. And those
installations a
On 08.04.09 10:45, Jesse Stroik wrote:
> Dropping mail outright because you can't reverse-resolve the mail server
> is bad, of course. And it /will/ drop messages from legitimate mail
> servers, especially those on private networks behind mail proxies as
> many older exchange installations are c
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> our customrer reported being listed in SpamRats blacklist.
What was that IP?
--
Rob McEwen
http://dnsbl.invaluement.com/
r...@invaluement.com
+1 (478) 475-9032
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
> wrote:
> >> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:48 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
> >> wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, John Hardin wrote:
> >> >> > How fast are non-SA DNS queries on that box? If they take ten seconds
> >> >> > to
> >>
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:48 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, John Hardin wrote:
>> >> >> > How fast are non-S
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, alexus wrote:
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:48 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, John Hardin wrote:
How fast are non-SA DNS queries on that box? If they take ten seconds to
return an answer, SA is not the culprit.
On 01.04.09 17:53, alexus wro
There are a group of rules that begin with TDV_ like
TVD_PH_SUBJ_ACCOUNTS_POST, TVD_QUAL_MEDS, TVD_RCVD_SINGLE
What does TDV stand for?
Hi!
TVD_PH_SUBJ_ACCOUNTS_POST, TVD_QUAL_MEDS, TVD_RCVD_SINGLE
What does TDV stand for?
Theo Van Dinter
Bye,
Raymond.
On Wed, April 8, 2009 19:13, Dennis G German wrote:
> What does TDV stand for?
DGG_ if you make rules ?
TDV is imho one of the sa developpers, but i cant remember them all :)
--
http://localhost/ 100% uptime and 100% mirrored :)
I know there used to be a nice convenient set of RBL's based upon
countries, such that you could easily track an IP address back to
which country it came from. But, IIRC, that RBL went under.
1) Does anyone know of a convenient command line tool (perl library
being ideal) that lets you give it an
John Rudd wrote:
> I know there used to be a nice convenient set of RBL's based upon
> countries, such that you could easily track an IP address back to
> which country it came from. But, IIRC, that RBL went under.
>
> 1) Does anyone know of a convenient command line tool (perl library
> being id
On Wed, April 8, 2009 21:44, John Rudd wrote:
> I know there used to be a nice convenient set of RBL's based upon
> countries, such that you could easily track an IP address back to
> which country it came from. But, IIRC, that RBL went under.
http://countries.nerd.dk/
[snip]
--
http://localh
John Rudd wrote:
> I know there used to be a nice convenient set of RBL's based upon
> countries, such that you could easily track an IP address back to
> which country it came from. But, IIRC, that RBL went under.
>
> 1) Does anyone know of a convenient command line tool (perl library
> being id
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 13:00 -0700, Bill Landry wrote:
> John Rudd wrote:
> > I know there used to be a nice convenient set of RBL's based upon
> > countries, such that you could easily track an IP address back to
> > which country it came from. But, IIRC, that RBL went under.
> > (it's only sligh
Hello John,
> Upgrading one package from CPAN _shouldn't_ be _that_ intrusive.
> Telling
> it to upgrade everthing is probably a bad idea, though.
I think that last time we used CPAN, I went to upgrade just one package,
and it caught the fact that I would be missing dependencies. It then
went abo
Matus UHLAR - fantomas a écrit :
> On 08.04.09 10:45, Jesse Stroik wrote:
>> Dropping mail outright because you can't reverse-resolve the mail server
>> is bad, of course. And it /will/ drop messages from legitimate mail
>> servers, especially those on private networks behind mail proxies as
>>
-Original Message-
From: Matus UHLAR - fantomas [mailto:uh...@fantomas.sk]
Sent: woensdag 8 april 2009 18:00
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Spam Rats - does anyone know them?
> What I am complaining about is that the IP is reported to be dynamic
> because it does not have h
I have maildrop installed on my system and I was thinking to enable a
global rule among of all my maildrop users
where all emails that have score 5.0 and higher would move into junk
e-mail folder, and rest should go to INBOX as it was in the past
can someone help me out with this?
--
http://ale
alexus wrote:
> I have maildrop installed on my system and I was thinking to enable a
> global rule among of all my maildrop users
>
> where all emails that have score 5.0 and higher would move into junk
> e-mail folder, and rest should go to INBOX as it was in the past
>
> can someone help me ou
Hello
on lint test i get the following message:
---
[r...@mailgw ~]# spamassassin --lint
[2871] warn: config: failed to parse line, skipping: use_auto_whitelist 0
[2871] warn: lint: 1 issues detected, please rerun with debug enabled for
more information
---
i comme
realshock wrote:
> Hello
> on lint test i get the following message:
> ---
> [r...@mailgw ~]# spamassassin --lint
> [2871] warn: config: failed to parse line, skipping: use_auto_whitelist 0
> [2871] warn: lint: 1 issues detected, please rerun with debug enabled for
> more informati
Hi,
I recently upgraded to 3.2.5 and re-trained bayes db from scratch. The
auto-learn is on so now I have about 6000 mails trained as spam and 3000
as ham. I tried to manually keep both spam and ham at the same level in
the bayes db but it seems that spamassassin is learning spam twice as
fast
39 matches
Mail list logo
