On 06.04.2008 03:26 CE(S)T, Matt Kettler wrote:
Yves Goergen wrote:
Just remember to su to that user when running sa-learn.
This is getting a problem now! My spamd user has no access on the
mailbox directories from which I am usually learning. What's the
proposed solution for that?
The new
On 06.04.2008 03:26 CE(S)T, Matt Kettler wrote:
The new fangled way would be to use spamc for learning instead of
sa-learn.
And yes, it's a lot faster I believe.
--
Yves Goergen LonelyPixel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit my web laboratory at http://beta.unclassified.de
thank you.
i have tried every config I can think of, including what you suggest.
still hanging up at entry into that particular inbox.
I also started using eudora again after many years because it was either
that or psychotropic drugs as a microsoft usergsigh, especially with
outlook.and I
For sake of completeness I would like to send out the solution to this, in case
anyone else is also having the same porblem.
It seems like there is a problem with forking on FreeBSD 6.3:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=119920
The solution to fix this problem is to edit the
Maybe I'm doing something wrong but the bounces we receive are getting
extremely low scores. My understanding was that by enabling VBounce in the
V3.2.4 config's and by adding:
whitelist_bounce_relays mailserver_name.com
we would have a shot at filtering out bounces. Instead we are seeing
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 13:19 -0400, Jeff Koch wrote:
Maybe I'm doing something wrong but the bounces we receive are getting
extremely low scores. My understanding was that by enabling VBounce in the
V3.2.4 config's and by adding:
whitelist_bounce_relays mailserver_name.com
we would have
I have a small private network which uses Postfix as the central MTA and
filters incoming mail with SA 3.2.4.
I do all my mail reading from a laptop, so after following the recent
discussion on using spamc -L as a convenient way to teach the Bayes
algorithm, I configured spamd to listen to both
On 06/04/2008 2:58 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
/usr/bin/spamd -d -c -m5 -A 127.0.0.1,192.168 --allow-tell -H -r
I've obviously missed something, so I'd appreciate help in spotting the
obvious mistake in configuring spamd.
192.168 isn't valid for -A. See the spamd POD for more info or just
add
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 20:02, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
On 06/04/2008 2:58 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
/usr/bin/spamd -d -c -m5 -A 127.0.0.1,192.168 --allow-tell -H -r
I've obviously missed something, so I'd appreciate help in spotting the
obvious mistake in configuring spamd.
192.168
On 06/04/2008 4:34 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 20:02, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
On 06/04/2008 2:58 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
/usr/bin/spamd -d -c -m5 -A 127.0.0.1,192.168 --allow-tell -H -r
I've obviously missed something, so I'd appreciate help in spotting the
obvious
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 21:47, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
On 06/04/2008 4:34 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 20:02, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
On 06/04/2008 2:58 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
/usr/bin/spamd -d -c -m5 -A 127.0.0.1,192.168 --allow-tell -H -r
I've obviously missed
Hi, I recently activated URIDNSBL and my scores went through the roof.
I'm a little worried about it.
So first, is this method a recommended in the SA community?
And secondly, how can I mod down the (high) scores I'm seeing? I
tried this in my local.cf file but it was ignored:
score URIBL_SBL
Juan Miscaro wrote:
Hi, I recently activated URIDNSBL and my scores went through the roof.
I'm a little worried about it.
So first, is this method a recommended in the SA community?
Given that it is on by default in all versions of spamassassin from
3.0.0 onward, calling it recommended
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 20:00 -0400, Juan Miscaro wrote:
Hi, I recently activated URIDNSBL and my scores went through the roof.
You mean you activated the plugin? What's your SA version? These checks
are enabled by default and actually are quite effective. As you noticed.
And as the plugin doc [1]
Sorry for quoting myself, just elaborating some more...
On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 02:52 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 20:00 -0400, Juan Miscaro wrote:
Hi, I recently activated URIDNSBL and my scores went through the roof.
You mean you activated the plugin? What's your
On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 03:09 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Sorry for quoting myself, just elaborating some more...
(c) Coming up with a new rule, that triggers on 30%+ of my low scoring
spam (aka 10). ;)
Eep -- I did mean to say 15 there. It's been a long day...
guenther
--
char
Hello Karsten:
Thanks for the reply. I thought the purpose of adding the
'whitelist_bounce_relays mailserver_name.com'
in local.cf was so that SA could assign a higher score to bounces that
never originated at your own mailserver. Thereby identifying return address
forgery.
At 02:04 PM
Hello first thing I would like to say is thanks for all the help and
suggestions so far, sorry for the delay in replying but I was trying to
understand all the suggestions.
I will add a few things to clarify what is actually happening.
I have a website www.pousada.com.br in Brazil. It is hosted
18 matches
Mail list logo
