I remember someone saying something about memory usage per
email that spamd uses to scan? But cannot find the
email, what is the estimated amount of memory used per SA scan? I also have clamav set up.
Thank you
Robert Bartlett
Director of Software Engineering
Digital Phoenix Hosting
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 6:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Memory usage question
At 09:26 PM 9/16/2004, Robert Bartlett wrote:
>I remember someone saying something ab
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 6:12 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Memory usage question
At 06:56 PM 9/16/2004 -0700, Robert Bartlett wrote:
>Thanks for the reply! Here is the deal,
-Original Message-
From: Brook Humphrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10:04 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Memory usage question
On Friday 17 September 2004 07:05, Chris Santerre wrote:
> Yeah, bring that 50 down a little :) Maybe 10. More m
-Original Message-
From: Robert Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10:12 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Memory usage question
-Original Message-
From: Brook Humphrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10
Just real quick if you started from scratch what would you recommend as a
good setup for SA?
Thanks
Robert
When you want to block an email address which one would be more effective?
To black list the email address in the local.cf file for SA? Or the
badmailfrom for qmail? Or do you suggest putting them in both?
Thanks
Robert
Im configuring a new server and decided to go with SA 3.0. My question is
I installed it, it appears to be running. So to complete the server setup
I install qmail-scanner, it tries to find applications it recognizes but
for SA it comes back with an error stating it appears it found spamc but
insta
Currently I use a maildrop script that checks the score given to the email
by SA and if it reaches a certain number or greater it gets sent to a
different mailbox.
My question is could you do that instead in SA local.cf and if so which
one would be better in doing this? Should I keep the maildrop
Thanks everyone for the replies. Is there a good known site to learn more
about maildrop scripts?
Thanks
Robert
> At 01:48 PM 10/22/2004, Robert Bartlett wrote:
>>Currently I use a maildrop script that checks the score given to the
>> email
>>by SA and if it reaches a cert
When I run spamassassin --lint, I get this error:
SA 3 config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping
It happens on certain items in local.cf like rewrite_header 1 and
terse_report. When I take them out if obviously works, other commands work
just fine as well, just these certain lines just
I have one client who gets 15-20 spam emails a day. Currently Im using SA
3.0.1. I had auto whitelist and auto learn on and since turned this off. I
ran spamd -D on one of the emails that got through that should of been
marked spam.
I noticed it scored a 2.6 with the regex test at the beginning
: Low scoring spam
At 10:09 AM 2/23/2005, Robert Bartlett wrote:
>I have one client who gets 15-20 spam emails a day. Currently Im using SA
>3.0.1. I had auto whitelist and auto learn on and since turned this off. I
>ran spamd -D on one of the emails that got through that should of bee
44 (0)1865 842300
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> Do you suggest until resolved disable this? If to disable it what exactly
do
> I need to disable?
>
> Thanks again!
> Robert
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, F
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 8:44 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Low scoring spam
At 10:31 AM 2/23/2005, Robert Bartlett wrote:
>Do you suggest until resolved disable this? If to disable it what exactly
do
>I need to disable?
Ok Im sorry I mis understood. I ran it the way you suggested and it did come
with headers this time. I attached the results. I still feel like something
else is wrong.
Thanks
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 10:38 AM
Hmm.. I wonder if it is even using the bayes db at all. I keep seeing it
find it but I dont see it actually being used. If that is the case how do I
make sure Bayes will be used for each message?
Thanks
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday,
Thanks for the input. I found this site:
http://www.fsl.com/support/index.html
My question is the zipped files gives you:
bayes/bayes.mutex
bayes/bayes_toks
bayes/bayes_seen
Does that mean I have to replace what I already have or is there a way to
import it?
Thanks
Robert
-Original Messag
Another question, since auto white list was on while the ALL_TRUSTED issue
was going on, should I delete the auto white list file in the root
spamassassin folder?
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Ken Goods [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 5:43 PM
To: users@spamas
I went ahead and instead feed it some ham around the office :)
Now it is using the bayes db, so that old spam log showed 2.99, with bayes
now working it scored it a 7
Thanks again!
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Ken Goods [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 5:43
Trying to cleanup any rules that might be outdated or a hinderance on our
server, was wondering if I still needed the rules listed below:
chickenpox.cf
weeds2.cf
random.cf
70_sare_unsub.cf
70_sare_uri.cf
Thanks
Robert
Im running qmail and Spamassasin 3.1 on Fedora Core 2. Im running qmail via
mysql database as well as SA. I doubt this is a SA issue, but I thought
someone might help on this list.
Basically I keep getting a full queue, like right now I have over 1000
emails in queue. Yet I can send and receive ju
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 10:40 AM
To: Robert Bartlett
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Heavy queues?
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> Im running qmail and Spamassasin 3.1 on Fedora Core 2. Im running qmail
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 2:54 PM
To: Robert Bartlett
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Heavy queues?
Robert Bartlett wrote:
>
> Have you looked at what the content of your queue is? Is it a
Running SA 3.01 on Fedora Core 2 with Qmail. The problem is recently Im
showing emails getting delivered to mailbox with the ***SPAM*** in the
title, yet the rules state if the email is spam it shouldn't be delivered to
the persons mailbox. The headers even show the score is over the spam count:
6.
Im using maildrop for that I believe. On a side note would you recommend I
use Amavis instead of maildrop?
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Loren Wilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 1:35 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Spam being delivered
>
If someone forwards me email as a regular forward and not as an attachment,
could I still feed it to bayes as the user who forwarded it to me and still
be effective? Or will that cause problems because the headers show as the
person forwarding the email and not the original headers?
What I mean ab
-Original Message-
From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 8:30 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Feeding Bayes Forwarded Emails
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> If someone forwards me email as a regular forward and not as an
> atta
-Original Message-
From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 10:48 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Feeding Bayes Forwarded Emails
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Robert Bartl
Interesting, I did that just to see how mine were doing and the BAYES one
returned 0? Does that mean bayes is not being used? I have been feeding
emails to bayes and in debug mode it shows bayes being used. I am using
bayes in a mysql. Just weird that its showing 0.
Robert
-Original Message--
data that I didn't want to show with *. When I run
sa-learn it trains into the mysql database just fine, I assume SA connects
to it just fine because of that.
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 1:32 PM
To: Robert Bar
1:47 PM
To: Robert Bartlett
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: rules better than bayes?
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> This is what I have in my local.cf file:
>
> bayes_store_module Mail::SpamAssassin::BayesStore::SQL
> bayes_sql_dsn
mails
coming in. Boy am I stupid.
Thanks
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Robert Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 1:52 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: rules better than bayes?
Sorry for the confusion, I do use a site wide bayes databa
Perhaps you can use fetchmail on the linux box? With some help I was able to
create a fetchmail script that did the following:
1. Look for account info for fetchmail via a mysql database
2. Grab the email from that account using fetchmail
3. Feed it to SA on the linux box and filter it like a norm
I had the same problem when I turned on trusted_networks. I was told to put
this in my local.cf for SA:
score ALL_TRUSTED 0
It seemed to resolve the problem
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Irina [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 9:22 AM
To: users@spamass
runs SA for hosted domains. Do I just add the ip address
of the local server and that's all?
Thanks
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 9:32 AM
To: Robert Bartlett
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: AW
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> Turned on/enabled, sorry for wrong choice of words.
Try "Configured" :)
> Actually I got this advice from this very same list, noone seemed to
> respond to the advice given in a bad way so I went ahead and did it.
Interesting. That particular piece of
I read the link Matt provided, it has this statement in the document that
looks to pertain to "starting from scratch", if you decide to do that:
"Now, with that said, it IS possible for the AWL to be polluted and cause
problems. Generally this is the result of past misconfiguration or scoring
prob
SA 3.0.1
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Loren Wilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 11:14 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: AWL and trusted_networks
Importance: High
> Turned on/enabled, sorry for wrong choice of words.
>
> Actually I got th
Since finding out the trusted_network issue I question the rest of my
local.cf setup. Right now I have AWL turned off and auto learning for bayes
turned off. My question is does SA benefit from turning those 2 back on? Of
course I would clear out AWL and bayes and start from scratch if I did. But
w
ttler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 12:04 PM
To: Robert Bartlett
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: AWL and Auto Learn Bayes
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> Since finding out the trusted_network issue I question the rest of my
> local.cf setup. Right now
, still
shows 3.0.1. Or does it really matter? I just want to make sure 3.0.5 is
running.
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Robert Bartlett
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: AWL and Auto Learn Bayes
I start SA by using service spamassassin start which is a file that pipes
stuff to spamc.
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:42 PM
To: Robert Bartlett
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: AWL and Auto
w the
link is not working? And it still shows as 3.0.1 in the header of emails.
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:42 PM
To: Robert Bartlett
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: AWL and Auto Learn Bayes
R
-scanner on
Fedora core 2.
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Robert Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:04 PM
To: 'Matt Kettler'
Cc: 'users@spamassassin.apache.org'
Subject: RE: AWL and Auto Learn Bayes
Looks like it was erroring out tryi
day, January 12, 2006 3:20 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: AWL and Auto Learn Bayes
From: "Craig McLean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Robert Bartlett wrote:
>> Since finding out the trusted_network i
y, January 12, 2006 3:30 PM
To: Robert Bartlett
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: AWL and Auto Learn Bayes
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> Ok fixed the symbolic link error, I updated the spamd script with the
> 3.0.5 one, but backed up the old one. Restored the old one and no
> err
obert Bartlett
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: AWL and Auto Learn Bayes
Robert Bartlett wrote:
> Ok fixed the symbolic link error, I updated the spamd script with the
> 3.0.5 one, but backed up the old one. Restored the old one and no
> errors. It still shows 3.0.5 in the l
Look in the logs, tail /var/log/maillog
-f
Then send the same email and watch the log. I believe there
is a setting or by default SA deletes the spam if it is high? Or maybe that is
the job for something like qmail-scanner? I notice in my log if something scores
really high I see SPAM-DELE
49 matches
Mail list logo
