On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:14:17 -0700, "Bret Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> Maybe it wouldn't make *your* life easier. But because it's visual, it
> allows me to more easily discern relevance when I put more than one list
> together in a mailbox. A certain subject in one list would be more
> rele
On 16 Sep 2004 13:39:30 -0700, "Daniel Quinlan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Feeding the Bayes rules through the scoring algorithm seems to imply a
> > lack of trust in the accuracy of the classifier.
>
> Mostly not. It's needed to map from the 0 to
jdow wrote:
My understanding is that Earthlink servers are "open" so that people
who are mobile can still send mail through their Earthlink accounts.
The way they handle the spam issue is a tarpit operation. The more
mails you send in a given interval the slower the mail processes. So
Earthlink mai
morticia wrote:
I wish they'd use it and make it the default. But I do not wish to pay
even more for my account because of the increased stupid luser support
calls that would generate. Getting plain old dialup or DSL working is
beyond most people. And many of them do not want to use something speci
Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote:
"Myth 4: PERL is designed for language processing, so
SpamAssassin is written in a more appropriate language.
Let me preface this with the fact that I've had about 10
years of experience coding PERL. While PERL is very useful
for lan
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Yup, I understand how the whole AWL works but my problem is that border
line spam is being dropped to ham. Example: A normal markup of 5.6 and
an AWL score of -0.8 drops it below the average user required_hits of 5
and does not get marked as spam.
Right, but it's an avera
David Brodbeck wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:26:12 -0700, snowjack wrote
Yeah, and it is true that SpamAssassin uses lots of RAM (20M per
process?) So what, RAM is cheap!
If I'm not mistaken, some of that 20M is actually shared amongst all the
spamd
processes, so it's not as much memor
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Snowjack wrote on Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:08:38 -0700:
Am I missing something?
Yes, all the SARE and other custom rulesets ;-) (Just as a FYI, not as a
critique).
Actually, those numbers were from SA 2.64 with the URIDNSBL patch and
most of the more conservative SARE rulesets
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Snowjack wrote on Sat, 25 Sep 2004 16:01:01 -0700:
Actually, those numbers were from SA 2.64 with the URIDNSBL patch and
most of the more conservative SARE rulesets. Didn't include BigEvil, of
course, or any of the SARE rules that said they occasionally hit ham.
When I
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:52:41 -0400 (EDT), "Dan Mahoney, System Admin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hey guys, as a quick survey, if you're blocking ips at the MTA level,
> which are you using?
I think it's a bad idea and don't do it at all. Much better to configure
your MTA to reject mail based on
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:57:28 -0500, "Bob Apthorpe"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hi,
Hello.
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:10:30 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:52:41 -0400 (EDT), "Dan Mahoney, System Admin"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > > Hey guys, as a quick survey, if
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:46:17 -0700, "Erik Wickstrom"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hi all,
>
> 2 problems.
>
> First, when I train SA on ham or spam, it seems to forget the
> counterpart.
>
> Example:
> sa-learn --mbox --showdots --ham inbox
>
> Would add say 300 hams to the Bayes DB, but turns
Kelson wrote:
How about ROSS: Real Open Source Software?
Bitchin' Open Source Software: BOSS
:-)
Loren Wilton wrote:
80M doesn't strike me as unusual for spamd if you have any of the addon
rulesets.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]@#&sputter...! Yes, that is too unusual unless you're using
ALL the addon rulesets, including BigEvil, which, I hear, eats pets and
small children when nobody's looking, and sho
On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 10:29:38 -0700, "Justin Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Please note that pretty much *all* our documentation notes that this is
> the case. You should NOT scan very large messages.
We configure our spamd client to only pass spamd up to the first 50KB of
a message. Definit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am running Postfix 2.1 with a content_filter (latest amavisd-new) which sends
all mail through SA 2.64. I understand *some* variables that are defined
explicitly in amavisd-new are "special", and thus have no effect when defined
(differently) in local.cf. AFAIK, scores
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting snowjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
...Did you restart amavisd-new after making the change?
Yes. :-)
Is there any evidence that local.cf is getting read at all?
Sahil Tandon wrote:
>
snowjack wrote:
Is there any evidence that local.cf is getting read at all?
Good question. Where do I look for such evidence? Logs are hardly
revealing.
If you first log in, or su to be the user amavis is running as, then run
"spamassassin -D --lint" y
Nate Schindler wrote:
Just a curiosity question for now - is auto-expiring the AWL a planned
feature?
My auto-whitelist is about 3x the size of bayes_toks. I imagine it'll
become problematic eventually, since it's only growing.
...or is there already some way to expire old entries from the AWL,
How completely rude. What are you, twelve years old?
jdow wrote:
It seems anabolic steroids are flat out missed by antidrug.cf. Of course,
I observe the idiot Apache spam trap on the spamassassin list does catch
the message sample when I attach it. Somebody needs to apply a clue bat
to the Apache m
My apologies to any twelve-year-olds on this list who have managed to
absorb more than the most fundamental principles of politeness.
snowjack wrote:
How completely rude. What are you, twelve years old?
jdow wrote:
It seems anabolic steroids are flat out missed by antidrug.cf. Of course,
I
Mathieu Nantel wrote:
As I've read a few articles on DSPAM claiming that it's better/faster/sexier
than spamassassin, I would appreciate having this list's comment on DSPAM.
I'm sure quite a few of you have tried it and might have some interesting
experiences to share. My understanding is that D
a real memory hog and has higher hardware
requirements than DSPAM to handle the same message load. But that's not
a big issue for us. We average about 25,000 messages per day from the
Internet with ~400 users. SpamAssassin is running on a dedicated Athlon
1.5 GHz machine with about 750MB of RAM, and we haven't had any
problems. Peak RAM usage is about 600MB.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
successful technique for us.
Using SURBLs is a HUGE win against the spammers. Thanks Jeff,
Raymond, Erik, and all the people who help make SURBLs so effective!
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
es 0.15, with about 5 spamd processes running.
Peak load varies, very occasionally going above 8, with around 30 spamd
processes at once. This system has been processing about 20,000 messages
per day lately.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
manually.
We're catching approximately 99% of spam, and rejecting (NOT bouncing)
the top-scoring 95% at the mail gateway. The 5% is to allow for false
positives, but I haven't been notified of any in months. Thanks to all
the ninjas, you guys rock!
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
cess normally
> Did user ever exist? Bounce.
> User never existed? Do something like the old spamshield
> (deny access to the sending system. Choose your method)
Pedantic nit-pick of the day:
I'm sure you meant reject instead of bounce, right?
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
he distinction. Apologies for the pedantry,
hopefully someone will find this educational and configure their gateway
MTA to reject mail addressed to invalid users, instead of trying to
relay to the final delivery server and then bouncing when it is refused.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
elist rule will hopefully pull it back under five points.
score BAYES_00 -4.9
score BAYES_01 -2.0
score BAYES_10 -1.5
score BAYES_20 -1.0
score BAYES_30 -0.5
score BAYES_40 0.1
score BAYES_44 0.7
score BAYES_50 1.0
score BAYES_56 1.5
score BAYES_60 2.1
score BAYES_70 3.1
score BAYES_80 4.2
score BAYES_90 4.9
score BAYES_99 5.4
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
ged in as the same user SpamAssassin's running as, what does
"sa-learn --dump magic" tell you?
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
age, which in the case of spam is almost certainly not
the real sender in any case
Reject: Your MTA does not accept the message, sending a 5XX to the
sending MTA, and generates no DSN.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
through. Sure, you don't get any bandwidth
advantage, but when a false positive could cost you $thousands, the
bandwidth is a lot less important than the accuracy.
So, it's not useless.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
dwidth that's used. My ISP pays their upstream for the extra
bandwidth used, and so on. It's just extra business for them, I'm sure
they're happy to see it.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
spamcop_uri_rbl('multi.surbl.org','127.0.0.0+64')
describe JP_URI_RBL URI's domain appears in jp.surbl.org
tflagsJP_URI_RBL net
score SPAMCOP_URI_RBL 2.4
score WS_URI_RBL 2.0
score PH_URI_RBL 2.4
score OB_URI_RBL 2.0
score AB_URI_RBL 2.4
score JP_URI_RBL 2.4
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 15:23:08 -0500, "Kris Deugau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> Snag mine from http://www.deepnet.cx/~kdeugau/spamtools/
Nice meta rules (BAYES_vs_SURBL) -- I like those a lot!!!
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
Richard Harding wrote:
I am looking at getting messages together to train spamassassin and told
users to forward me messages that are spam that still get through. Is
this an ok method of collecting or will the fact that so many are
forwarded messages throw off the training?
In short, yes, it wil
<
> 200
> debug: bayes: 23170 untie-ing
> debug: bayes: 23170 untie-ing db_toks
> debug: bayes: 23170 untie-ing db_seen
>
> I've gotta be doing something wrong here. Any suggestions?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lisa Casey
>
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
rejected
at the mail gateway). Periodically I run through a bunch of recent ham
and copy it into the ham folder. A nightly script cleans out those IMAP
folders, runs sa-learn on the messages, and copies them into ham/spam
folders on the server, so I can use those if I need a corpus of manually
verified messages.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
/var/mail/netlinkspam"
/bin/su - defang -c "/usr/bin/sa-learn --sync"
/bin/rm /var/mail/netlinkspam/*
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
tuff on the ends of messages, and 900
> lines of quotation for a few lines of comment is really excessive.
>
> Some subscribers to this list are still using modems, you know.
I guess that explains why your reply didn't hit the list until five days
after the thread died... :-)
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
Kang, Joseph S. wrote:
As for the dump output..
0.000 0108 1103190407 N:H*i:sk:NNfNNNc
[snipped for brevity]
The fourth is the token itself. SA uses some "prefix" characters for
encoding things, but without any prefix, a token is a word in
the body of
the message.
I think you
William Holman wrote:
I've been over-ruled by those who pay the bills, so I can't use
SpamAssassin since it's "open source"
How do I unsubscribe from the lists?
Thank-you!
I have an anti-spam product I, ah, we, ah, my COMPANY, (yeah, that's the
ticket) call "Sno
snowjack wrote:
I have an anti-spam product I, ah, we, ah, my COMPANY, (yeah, that's the
ticket) call "Snowjack Scanner" which is at least as effective as any
other... commercial solution. It has a Bayes filter, score averaging by
sender, whitelisting capabilities, many effec
Richard Ozer wrote:
Oh good! Can I buy a service contract too? Hopefully it's priced per spam!
Jeez, I knew I was forgetting something. :-)
Over the past month I've seen a ~25% dropoff in the amount of spam we're
receiving on a daily basis. Anyone else seeing a significant drop in
spam recently?
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
software can be configured to return a 5XX based on the
SA score. Some plugins that allow your MTA to talk to SpamAssassin can
do this, some can't. You'll need to do some research based on which MTA
software you're using. Here's a start:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/IntegratedInMta
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
s a week, over 90%
spam. Last week we got 80,000 messages. Some people suggested that it
was due to the holidays, but it was a fairly steady decline starting in
late November, so it may have been something else. I hope it doesn't
ramp up again, but who knows, maybe it was the holidays after all. I'll
post an update next week unless anyone objects.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
SpamAssassin into Sendmail.
I don't use spamass-milter, so I can't vouch for how well it works, but
a quick Google search revealed that using the "-r" command-line option
to spamass-milter in the /etc/init.d script will set the rejection
level.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
onal level anyway, but to work to produce
> actual releases for others, I think a bit more of an interest is needed.
Me too. I'm a Debian user, so I'm sticking with 2.64 as long as it's
working well. Unless 3.X goes into Sarge, which I suspect is unlikely.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
checking software gets
dynamic information from pattern update servers, RBLs, SURBL, Razor,
DCC, etc. etc. etc.
In a nutshell: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
ing our users removed from spammer
lists, or if there's some other factor. I was thinking maybe overall
Internet spam was dropping, but from your replies last week, that
doesn't seem to be the case. Anyway, I guess we're doing *something*
right. :-)
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
.
Security updates will be necessary from time to time.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
52 matches
Mail list logo
