On 3/26/2009 7:31 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
ASSP should be REJECTING invalid recipients.
I see no reason why ASSP should reject invalid recipients when the MTA
does an excellent job doing that.
The OP was complaining that he was getting spam TO a non-existent USER,
and asked how to 'drop
I'm a little confused on how to catch false positives in ASSP (Ham
that ASSP thinks is Spam). When setting up ASSP, the Wiki says to run
in Test mode and to Be sure the Prepend Spam Subject is also
blank. Then, after in Test mode for a while, it says Either turn
off Test Mode or put
ja...@jwhorn.com wrote:
in Test mode and to Be sure the Prepend Spam Subject is also
blank.
This would be incorrect. Is should have a tag, in our case, it's [SPAM]
Then, after in Test mode for a while, it says Either turn
off Test Mode or put something like [SPAM] in the Prepend to
For Users of ASSP assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
But if you turn off test mode, you will never see
Ham that ASSP thinks is Spam, because ASSP will filter it out.
There is a section called Copy Spam Ham!
You should have all Spams send to sendAllSpam.
For Users of ASSP assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
This would be incorrect. Is should have a tag, in our case, it's
[SPAM]
That is absolutely correct. If you starting your ASSP installation for
the first time, no user should see anything strange. So the first
several days (weeks) you
Doug,
Thanks for the reply. I'm surprised that the ASSP wiki is incorrect.
I don't know who maintains it, but if those sections are really
incorrect, I hope somebody will update them.
- Jason
On Mar 27, 2009, at 9:35 AM, Doug Lytle wrote:
ja...@jwhorn.com wrote:
in Test mode and to Be
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
That is absolutely correct. If you starting your ASSP installation for
the first time, no user should see anything strange. So the first
several days (weeks) you run in testmode WITHOUT a tag.
Really? When we first started out, the end users helped in the training
Fritz,
That's interesting. Does the addition of the prepend to the subject
(spamSubject) affect the accuracy of the filtering, or is it just for
the sake of informing users? I had assumed that the reason not to
initially set a value in spamSubject was because the filters would
then be
This makes sense to me. This is why I find is so strange that the
Wiki makes a strong point of saying Be sure the Prepend Spam
Subject is also blank, without explaining why.
- Jason
On Mar 27, 2009, at 10:22 AM, Doug Lytle wrote:
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
That is absolutely correct. If you
For Users of ASSP assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
Really? When we first started out, the end users helped in the
training
of the database.
Doug
You may have your own strategy. The strategy of ASSP is to have some
days to get familiar with the system. It is unnessary (and we think
For Users of ASSP assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
That's interesting. Does the addition of the prepend to the subject
(spamSubject) affect the accuracy of the filtering, or is it just for
the sake of informing users?
It is for informing users.
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
You may have your own strategy. The strategy of ASSP is to have some
days to get familiar with the system. It is unnessary (and we think
wrong) to have user involved in this stage. In Getting Started ( and
This is acceptable. We've been using ASSP since 2003 when
Doug Lytle wrote:
Really? When we first started out, the end users helped in
the training of the database.
You trust your end users to do that during initial training? LoL!
--
Brett
--
Hill, Brett wrote:
You trust your end users to do that during initial training? LoL!
For the most part, it worked well. For those that had questions, we had
them call the help desk.
Doug
--
Ben Franklin quote:
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary
Hello ,
any takers on the v1.4.3.1 to v1.5.1 upgrade ?
Haven't heard anything from anyone .
Also, I've located a message in the /usr/local/assp/spam/ folder
that is ham.
Just how do I proceed on delivering this message to its intended
receipient and informing assp it flagged a false-positive
Spyros Tsiolis wrote:
Hello ,
any takers on the v1.4.3.1 to v1.5.1 upgrade ?
I've just done this on my home ASSP server. I went from 1.3.9 to
1.5.1.0 and then updated to 1.5.1.1 (0.07) and am still reading.
I did:
Killed the ASSP process
Backup ASSP folder
Verified that I had the
Hi all,
I am using the email interface to request a block report, but nothing
happens. I send email to bloc...@assp.local, but don't get a reply.
I have tried various forms of the email (subject, no subject,
addresses in the body, no addresses in the body, etc), but I get
nothing back.
For Users of ASSP assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
QueueUSerBlockReports: run instantly
set it to run delayed
--
___
Assp-user mailing list
ja...@jwhorn.com wrote:
Hi all,
I am using the email interface to request a block report, but nothing
happens. I send email to bloc...@assp.local, but don't get a reply.
Actually, this works for me as long as the email address that I'm
sending from isn't in the:
EmailAdmins:=
If
Doug,
Thanks for the reply. I tried removing all addresses from
EmailAdmins, but it made no difference.
On Mar 27, 2009, at 2:07 PM, Doug Lytle wrote:
ja...@jwhorn.com wrote:
Hi all,
I am using the email interface to request a block report, but nothing
happens. I send email to
For Users of ASSP assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
Fritz,
Thanks for your help. I tried this, but it did not make any
difference. Any other ideas, or steps I could take to diagnose?
I asked already, if you can request a report as user ( not being an
admin)
Fritz,
I have tried every combination I can think of:
request a report as a user
request a report as admin
as user with no subject or body
as user with subject only
as admin with no subject or body
as admin with subject only
as admin with subject and addresses in body
as admin with no subject
Not sure if this is important, but I turned on verbose connection
logging and verbose report logging. When I send a report request, I
notice there is a long time between the connection, and the
disconnection. The log looks like this:
Mar-27-09 21:13:16 Connected: 96.253.44.215:51792 -
I have a problem sender (a local TV station) that is bombarding us with
legitimate messages to 3 different users, but one of these addresses is no
longer active, resulting in them surpassing our Extreme PB levels.
They are not responding to my emails to remove the bad address, so I'm looking
24 matches
Mail list logo
