Guten Tag Kevin,
am Dienstag, 9. Januar 2007 um 02:30 schrieben Sie:
K Chris Norman wrote:
You know, it's a good think I didn't want historical data too far in the
past!
From the stats page:
* Note: historical data is only available back to Sep 4, 2003*
LOL. j/k.
Perhaps that date
I understand what PB is now, but I'd still like to be able weight
test and give each e-mail a final spam score. I envision it working
like PB. The user weights each test. After each test, its score is
added to a total, and if the total ever surpasses a user-defined
limit, testing stops and
Matti Haack wrote:
Total number of blocked spams is 0 - I assume that this
will be calculated onec a day. But then the output should be
totalnumber+BlockedSpamtoday
Actually it comes from the history table, something thats still getting
worked on.
The default was 1 Million but that was
I'm using ASSP v1.2.6 on my shared hosting server. I've come to know that
ASSP is logging almost every sender domain as Forged HELO. I did a PING for
the mentioned domain and I think it should not be a Forged HELO.
Following are some lines from maillog.txt...
Jan-9-07 03:27:04 Connected:
I understand what PB is now, but I'd still like to be able weight
test and give each e-mail a final spam score. I envision it working
like PB. The user weights each test. After each test, its score is
added to a total, and if the total ever surpasses a user-defined
limit, testing stops
(4) is working fine. (7) stops after a few minutes.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT business topics through
(4) is working fine. (7) stops after a few minutes.
(8) seems fine
thx fritz, you're da man !
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
I want to know that (1) what is the rule of marking domains/hosts as
Forged
HELO
a local domain is usually a forged helo
and (2) how can I fix it?
there is an exclusion list in section Sender
Actually, I sorta figured out the score only after I built the
spamdb
earlier this evening and finally got spam-prob to show something other
than 0, .5, and 1. However, I still don't see any way to specify
weight
or adjust the 0.6 limit. And I'd really like to see more tests with
scoring,
(8) seems fine
Please look for ClamAV performance, I am actually quite proud, that
the rework of the ClamAV integration works so nicely. It is fast and
it is catching 100%.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future
Hi Fritz,
I second that, works pefect right now. It also catches the eicars :)
Well done, good job!
Is saw also that the stream setting was lost from the gui, do we only
need to set the AV Bytes now ?
(8) seems fine
Please look for ClamAV performance, I am actually quite proud, that
No need. just copy the spam.db file, there is nothing os or install
specific about the spam.db.
Correct. While I run ASSP on low end PIII type machines with little (256MB)
RAM, I run the spamdb rebuild over Samba from a beefy Windows server.
Although - the file is called spamdb on my ASSP
2007/1/8, Andreas Krüger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So we never got an answer to this. Is he screwed? Or what does he need
to do to fix it? Just delete some spam messages or?
Make sure you have Spam Control Use Subject as Maillog Names disabled.
(Wouldn't this option better be in the Collecting
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
For example, user sets a limit of 100, and weights HELO at 90 and
spam bomb at 15. If a server fails HELO, the e-mail isn't rejected,
but if it also fails spam bomb (90+15100), then it's spam.
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
Is saw also that the stream setting was lost from the gui, do we only
need to set the AV Bytes now ?
Yes, and I made a new default: 100k
Fritz Borgstedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
For example, user sets a limit of 100, and weights HELO at 90 and
spam bomb at 15. If a server fails HELO, the
Please look for ClamAV performance, I am actually quite proud, that
the rework of the ClamAV integration works so nicely.
Yes you should be really proud. 100% working for me at the first
glimpse.
Matti
-
Matti Haack - Hit Haack IT Service Gmbh
Poltlbauer Weg 4, D-94036 Passau
+49 851
Hi George,
As others have already explained, ASSP has nothing to do with POP. ASSP
only sits between your incoming connection and your SMTP port. In your
case, you are using Merak, and have been using Pop before SMTP to perform
relay authentication. I had been doing the same thing. I agree
Eric B. wrote:
Hi George,
As others have already explained, ASSP has nothing to do with POP. ASSP
only sits between your incoming connection and your SMTP port. In your
case, you are using Merak, and have been using Pop before SMTP to perform
relay authentication. I had been doing the
Pascal Dreissen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Fritz,
I second that, works pefect right now. It also catches the eicars :)
Well done, good job!
Is saw also that the stream setting was lost from the gui, do we only
need to set the AV Bytes now ?
Does this
Micheal wrote:
My suspicion is related to the known issue with Win32 and Net-DNS 0.59.
I think you are seeing negative PTR lookups because Net-DNS is timing out.
Could you try to downgrade to 0.57?
Downgrade complete. Will have same high-network-activity conditions again later
this week, and
Micheal Espinola Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eric B. wrote:
Hi George,
As others have already explained, ASSP has nothing to do with POP. ASSP
only sits between your incoming connection and your SMTP port. In your
case, you are using Merak, and have been
Does this mean that the new ClamAV integration is no longer taking up huge
amounts of CPU resources? If so, do we just use the new default settings
for this?
Yes. Works for me at the moment without issues.
Matti
-
Matti Haack - Hit Haack IT Service Gmbh
Poltlbauer Weg 4, D-94036 Passau
Eric B. wrote:
I haven't checked recently, but at the time when I was installing/learning
ASSP, there was no documentation that I could find that related specifically
to how the popb4smtp functionality worked in ASSP. I had to read through
the code and run sample tests to figure out
From: Evan Eggers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sample IP addresses from earlier today reported as PTRmissing by ASSP, but
having valid PTR according to dnsstuff are:
208.61.234.147
151.124.247.101
199.230.26.212
Perhaps DNSStuff is more persistent but when i tried using NSLookup from the
command prompt of
brougham Baker wrote:
From: Evan Eggers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sample IP addresses from earlier today reported as PTRmissing by ASSP, but
having valid PTR according to dnsstuff are:
208.61.234.147
151.124.247.101
199.230.26.212
Perhaps DNSStuff is more persistent but when i tried using
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
208.61.234.147
151.124.247.101
199.230.26.212
Perhaps DNSStuff is more persistent but when i tried using NSLookup from
the
command prompt of a windows workstation they all timed out. I tried
known-good addresses and they worked properly.
brougham Baker wrote:
The known good ones answer instantly as I would expect (they are also not my
ISP's servers and are unlikely to be cached by me at a least). It's just the
above addresses that didn't answer for me. I tried using UDP, switching to
TCP resolution does get answers eventually-
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
I think that the difference (from my understanding at least) that
Bennett is
asking for is a weighting for individual tests for individual emails.
Yes, I understand and that can be
- Original Message -
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: 09 January 2007 16:58
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Incorrect PTRmissing?
brougham Baker wrote:
The known good ones
Fritz Borgstedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
I think that the difference (from my understanding at least) that
Bennett is
asking for is a weighting for individual
Micheal Espinola Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eric B. wrote:
I haven't checked recently, but at the time when I was
installing/learning
ASSP, there was no documentation that I could find that related
specifically
to how the popb4smtp functionality worked
Eric B. wrote:
Well - not really. I was (and am) very clear on the difference between POP
and SMTP, and was very well aware that ASSP was purely an SMTP proxy and had
nothing to do with POP. What I had found confusing was how ASSP integrated
with a POP server to allow for Pop before SMTP.
Working fine on Windows 2000 Server. Appears much quicker at sending Files
through ClamAV than previous versions. On a Pentium 1000 Processor
Utilization still peaks at 100%, although only very briefly. Very useable
now in my opinion.
One observation: Whitelisted e-mails don't seem to pass
Bob Coffman Jr - Info From Data wrote:
Although - the file is called spamdb on my ASSP machines, not spam.db.
There's no difference in the naming convention on Windows, right?
It's actually configurable in the admin interface.
I renamed all my files to follow the same conventions.
Kevin
So then the lack of understanding is with what POP before SMTP is,
and/or how it works. I don't know what you mean by fileformats
here.
Sometimes.. No, ASSP does not use a different approach to
POPb4SMTP and it states clearly, that it will use the file the
mailserver maintains. Somebody
Is there (or could there) be a way to enable ClamAV for whitelisted
users?
It is coming, also for Nonprocessing.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
Sometimes.. No, ASSP does not use a different approach to
POPb4SMTP and it states clearly, that it will use the file the
mailserver maintains. Somebody then followed the given advice and
wrote something for Merak and I included that as an option. It is one
of the
Thanks for filling in the blanks for me. I've never used POP before
SMTP, but now I have a better understanding of how it works with ASSP. )
I've never used it either, and would not do so, since it is supposedly a
security risk (not sure on the whys and hows).
--
Best regards,
Charles
I think that the difference (from my understanding at least) that
Bennett is asking for is a weighting for individual tests for
individual emails.
LOL...yes, that's exactly what I was looking for. I spent all this
morning confused and looking back over PB and all the ASSP settings,
until I
Bennett Lee wrote:
LOL...yes, that's exactly what I was looking for. I spent all this
morning confused and looking back over PB and all the ASSP settings,
until I finally re-read the PB wiki to find out that PB is exactly what
I thought--a score that applies to the server.
I'm still
Charles Marcus wrote:
I've never used it either, and would not do so, since it is supposedly a
security risk (not sure on the whys and hows).
Most likely because it could be tricked by IP spoofing known clients.
-
Take
I thought--a score that applies to the server.
I'm still interested in the individual e-mail score--it just makes
sense
to me.
Would you believe me, that you are wrong. I described the possibility
of using scoring to combine tests very early. There is a reason, that
I put in the *score only*
Agreed, however, like I said, that kind of kills the concept of using
the
PenaltyBox in that case for the actual purpose for which it was
intended.
How can you say that? My purpose was absolutely to have both functions
in it - why would the *score only* option exist anyway?
Look into the
From: Fritz Borgstedt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
May be Doug will say something, he is the one I believe who uses it
(besides me).
That what? Uses the PB to block persistent idiot ip addresses? I do too.
What feature do you mean?
Bro
Hello,
I am sitting here and reading the process order for an email when it
runs trough ASSP, and i was wondering what these things is, and what
they do?
* PenaltyExtreme - Penalty Box extreme blocking
* ForgedHELO - forged HELO detection (built-in)
* DoRBLCache - caching and reuse
Can anyone advise what the repercussions may be from enabling the Fake
250 error in Validate Local's options?
I would like to enable LDAP Validation, but I am concerned it will block
legitimate email that was misaddressed. And also it may make it harder
to troubleshoot.
Also, does the
Think about. If you enable the fake, no misadressed adresses will ever be
reported back to the sender.
--
ME2 (mobile)
-Original Message-
From: Greg Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tuesday, Jan 9, 2007 8:33 pm
Subject: [Assp-user] Fake 250 with LDAP
This is a multi-part message in
Yeah, which was why I asked if it was able to work in with the PB. I
don't want to be so heavy handed if I can avoid it.
Im also interested in IF i do decide to be heavy handed, does the faked
250 error result in any unusual conditions? I would like to learn from
the list's experiences, rather
Greg Wright wrote:
Yeah, which was why I asked if it was able to work in with the PB. I
don't want to be so heavy handed if I can avoid it.
Why do you want to do this? First, you are violating RFCs governing how
MTA behave. Second, you are potentially making debugging valid email
problems
Hi Michael,
First up, thank you for considering my question, i've been a member for
a long time, and the group is lucky to have your assistance.
I want to do this because daily I get hundreds (or more) non-deliverable
emails delivered from servers all across the internet to email addresses
here
Greg Wright wrote:
I want to do this because daily I get hundreds (or more) non-deliverable
emails delivered from servers all across the internet to email addresses
here that don't exist. The kind of thing that happens when your domain
is used by the spammers as the From: address. So my ASSP,
52 matches
Mail list logo
