At 18:23 02-12-2008, Byung-Hee HWANG wrote:
Are you using FreeBSD or NetBSD? If so, i understand you.
Unfortunately, SA developers do not care about IPv6 yet. So here SA
program at first do action with 127.0.0.1 than ::1, i guess ;;
This was tested on a BSD system. SpamAssassin developers
Hello,
I am relatively new to SpamAssassin and have some problems with email which
seems to get completely different scores when I check them manually than
when the automatic check upon reception by the Exim mail server is
performed.
Before we use an own spam filter the mail was put into an
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 02:00 -0800, Björn K wrote:
Hello,
I am relatively new to SpamAssassin and have some problems with email which
seems to get completely different scores when I check them manually than
when the automatic check upon reception by the Exim mail server is
performed.
Björn K wrote on Wed, 3 Dec 2008 02:00:32 -0800 (PST):
How can the results be so very different on the same spam process?
Too many whys ;-) Comparing overall scores doesn't provide any insight.
You want to compare the rules that hit, then you'll see what is different
(and most of the
Thank you, that should help. I don't really wanna print the whole headers
here (not giving away too many internals on how which company's mails I
handle in which way and what problems I have with it).
It's a spamassassin 3.1.7 out of the Debian (Etch) repository (debian
revision 2).
Karsten
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 03:36 -0800, Björn K wrote:
Thank you, that should help. I don't really wanna print the whole headers
here (not giving away too many internals on how which company's mails I
handle in which way and what problems I have with it).
Forwarding mail for companies (smells like
On Wed, December 3, 2008 05:48, Matt Kettler wrote:
That said, I've never seen a spammer re-use the same address twice.
i have :-)
olso why spf / dkim whitelist is the way to go, let spammers try to
get whitelisted
microsoft got it wroung with Block Sender :)
--
Benny Pedersen
Need more
SA doesn't use EvalTests.pm's check_for_from_to_same test, but part of
the code looks like this:
return 0 if (!length($hdr_from) || !length($hdr_to) ||
$hdr_from eq $hdr_to);
Is that right? Shouldn't the 'eq' be 'ne'?
--
We're just a Bunch Of Regular Guys, a collective group
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 07:13:26AM -0700, Kelly Jones wrote:
SA doesn't use EvalTests.pm's check_for_from_to_same test, but part of
the code looks like this:
Wow. Had to whip out the 3.1 code to find this...
Is that right? Shouldn't the 'eq' be 'ne'?
As the comment about 6 lines up from
From: Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 23:48:57 -0500
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
that future uses of the AWL for that
--On Tuesday, December 2, 2008 12:23 -0800 Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You query hostkarma.junkemailfilter.com
Not listed = new (new to us anyhow)
127.0.2.1 = last day
127.0.2.2 = last week
127.0.2.3 = older than a week
OK - so here's the rub. This catches 100% of all new
Yes, Thanks
On Tuesday 02 December 2008 17:38:17 Kenneth Porter wrote:
--On Thursday, November 27, 2008 10:44 PM -0600 Luis Daniel Lucio Quiroz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder if there is any module for SA to detect pornographic photos, not
only OCR.
How about setting up a system
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:56:58 -0500, Jeff Mincy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 23:48:57 -0500
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also
-Original Message-
From: Marc Perkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 12:04 AM
it's WORKING
Well,
it hangs my SA 3.2.4 setup on waiting for a reply from ctyme.ixhash.net .
The strange thing is that it consumes a lot of CPU while hanging... Some
I just tried again with this 1.5.2 version and on box it times out querying and
on another it seems to run but no hits again. Both my boxes are SA3.2.5.
Does anyone have a message that is known to have hashes on any of iXhash hosts?
-Original Message-
From: Giampaolo Tomassoni
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 17:38 +, Nigel Frankcom wrote:
Is Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SAGrey part of the stat SA set? Neither
yum nor CPAN seem to be able to find it here... though that could
easily be down to user error.
Google finds it quite easily. ;)
I am completing some testing on new altermime version 0.3.10 for freebsd
(it has already been submitted to ports)
If you remember, using dkim signing and altermime would add \r\n to
emails if you added disclaimers.
(i have separate plain text and html disclaimers)
Several emails to [EMAIL
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 01:08:32PM -0500, Rose, Bobby wrote:
I just tried again with this 1.5.2 version and on box it times out querying
and on another it seems to run but no hits again. Both my boxes are SA3.2.5.
Does anyone have a message that is known to have hashes on any of iXhash
Never mind the below, I solved it with
header J_CHSET3
Subject:raw=~/\s=\?(windows-(125[0125]|874)|koi8-r|GB2312|iso-8859-[28])\?/i
The below:
Here we go again.
How can I filter on
X-Spam-Languages: zh.gb2312
run it through spamassassin a second time?
Use _LANGUAGES_ somehow in a regexp?
Of
Hi all,
I am wanting to implement the sanesecurity addins to clamav but i am a
bit lost.
I am running CentOS5 MailScanner Spamassassin ClamAV
Do I download the download scripts from
http://www.sanesecurity.com/clamav/usage.htm
or do I go to the downloads page? (they seem to be different)
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 09:49:23AM +1300, Lists wrote:
Hi all,
I am wanting to implement the sanesecurity addins to clamav but i am a
bit lost.
I am running CentOS5 MailScanner Spamassassin ClamAV
Do I download the download scripts from
http://www.sanesecurity.com/clamav/usage.htm
or
I am wanting to implement the sanesecurity addins to clamav but i am a
bit lost.
I am running CentOS5 MailScanner Spamassassin ClamAV
Kate, this is the wrong mailing list. The ClamAV users list comes
closest for third-party ClamAV (sic) signatures without a list of their
own.
Do I download
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Arthur Dent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 01:08:32PM -0500, Rose, Bobby wrote:
I just tried again with this 1.5.2 version and on box it times out querying
and on another it seems to run but no hits again. Both my boxes are SA3.2.5.
Does
Matt Kettler a écrit :
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
that future uses of the AWL for that spammer will push the overall spam
score up?
Thots?
If a spammer
We have set -s for spamc to 350k - and we can use spamassassin -t on
messages of that size, but we can not sa-learn them, sa-learn -D -t puts
out:
[17460] info: archive-iterator: skipping large message
Learned tokens from 0 message(s) (0 message(s) examined)
Can we pass the 350k limit to
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
I am wanting to implement the sanesecurity addins to clamav but i am a
bit lost.
I am running CentOS5 MailScanner Spamassassin ClamAV
Kate, this is the wrong mailing list. The ClamAV users list comes
closest for third-party ClamAV (sic) signatures without a
Arthur Dent wrote:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 09:49:23AM +1300, Lists wrote:
Hi all,
I am wanting to implement the sanesecurity addins to clamav but i am a
bit lost.
I am running CentOS5 MailScanner Spamassassin ClamAV
Do I download the download scripts from
Wolfgang Zeikat wrote:
We have set -s for spamc to 350k - and we can use spamassassin -t on
messages of that size, but we can not sa-learn them, sa-learn -D -t puts
out:
Sorry, it's late here. What I meant is
sa-learn -D --spam puts out:
[17460] info: archive-iterator: skipping large
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 12:43 +1300, Lists wrote:
Arthur Dent wrote:
The best thing to do is to download the script, put it somewhere where
the user that will run it (possibly clamav) has read + execute access,
(I created a /home/clamav/ directory) and then try running it manually
first.
Thank you for the information I will attempt to get it up an running,
have had a huge increase in spam last week or so and just trying to get
it under control.
What type of *spam* are you referring to that you want to kill by
throwing anti-virus signatures at them? Are all of them phishing
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Thank you for the information I will attempt to get it up an running,
have had a huge increase in spam last week or so and just trying to
get it under control.
What type of *spam* are you referring to that you want to kill by
throwing anti-virus signatures at
mouss wrote:
Matt Kettler a écrit :
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
that future uses of the AWL for that spammer will push the overall spam
score up?
Michael,
I am completing some testing on new altermime version 0.3.10 for freebsd
(it has already been submitted to ports)
If you remember, using dkim signing and altermime would add \r\n to
emails if you added disclaimers.
(i have separate plain text and html disclaimers)
Actually just a
-Original Message-
From: Niels Przybilla [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 3 December 2008 6:01 p.m.
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: bohunu
Hi,
is somebody here using bohunu.com
Is it worth testing it ?
BR Niels
Hello,
I was using Pyzor until about 2 months
Matt Kettler a écrit :
mouss wrote:
Matt Kettler a écrit :
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
that future uses of the AWL for that spammer will push the
Lists a écrit :
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Thank you for the information I will attempt to get it up an running,
have had a huge increase in spam last week or so and just trying to
get it under control.
What type of *spam* are you referring to that you want to kill by
throwing
mouss wrote:
Matt Kettler a écrit :
mouss wrote:
Matt Kettler a écrit :
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
that future uses of
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 13:48 +1300, Lists wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
What type of *spam* are you referring to that you want to kill by
throwing anti-virus signatures at them? Are all of them phishing or
scam?
Hey, you said spam. We might be back on-topic, however gray! ;)
Yeah
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 13:48 +1300, Lists wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
What type of *spam* are you referring to that you want to kill by
throwing anti-virus signatures at them? Are all of them phishing or
scam?
Hey, you said spam. We might be back
I want to run a message through ONE SpamAssassin test w/o the overhead
of running all the tests.
I realize many SA tests are just regexs (so I could use procmail or
something), but this test is a meta test and it may change from time
to time.
Does SA have a --run-just-this-test=FOO option?
--
mouss wrote:
Lists a écrit :
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Thank you for the information I will attempt to get it up an running,
have had a huge increase in spam last week or so and just trying to
get it under control.
What type of *spam* are you referring to that you want
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 02:26 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 13:48 +1300, Kate wrote:
Yeah have been getting lots of variations of:
http://www.pastebin.ca/1275436
Quite a lot are getting caught but in saying that alot are still getting
through.
That one
Darly posted a very similar rule to this a while ago, triggering on the
strange cid- prefix in the live spaces URI. You can use that just as
well.
Thanks I will give that rule a shot and check out the earlier post by Darly.
Whoops. :) Daryl C. W. O'Shea I mean... Sorry Daryl. Would
On 03/12/2008 9:06 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Darly posted a very similar rule to this a while ago, triggering on the
strange cid- prefix in the live spaces URI. You can use that just as
well.
Thanks I will give that rule a shot and check out the earlier post by Darly.
Whoops. :) Daryl
On Wednesday 03 December 2008 7:01 pm, Michael Hutchinson wrote:
Hello,
I was using Pyzor until about 2 months ago. It was quite good then, I
don't think I ever got a False Positive with it, and it did stop a lot
of Spam - not as much as Razor, but still significant. I had to take it
Kelly Jones wrote:
I want to run a message through ONE SpamAssassin test w/o the overhead
of running all the tests.
I realize many SA tests are just regexs (so I could use procmail or
something), but this test is a meta test and it may change from time
to time.
Does SA have a
is there anything wrong with still using an older pre 1.5.x version of
iXhash?
is there a problem that makes an upgrade recommended?
OR
is there a problem that forces up to upgrade?
- rh
47 matches
Mail list logo
