In the thread:
http://osdir.com/ml/debian-bugs-closed/2009-08/msg01318.html
Error code 98 is described as the message being fed being to big and the
problem resolved. But it is not.
I have a big message:
-rw-r--r-- 1 imaps users 1,4M 2010-01-11 18:05
In the latter case, you can use the suggested check
for domains,
It doesn't matter which other mail servers the clients use.
Kai
--
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
yes, good point. I've updated the POD docs now for 3.3.0.
--j.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 09:01, Cecil Westerhof ce...@decebal.nl wrote:
In the thread:
http://osdir.com/ml/debian-bugs-closed/2009-08/msg01318.html
Error code 98 is described as the message being fed being to big and the
I'm using SA 3.2.5 and sa-update but SA doesn't seem to be picking rules
up from /var/lib/spamassassin/
The rules are present:
-bash-3.2$ ls -Rl1h /var/lib/spamassassin/
/var/lib/spamassassin/:
total 4.0K
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4.0K Jan 2 04:40 3.002005
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.002005:
total
geoff.spamassass...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote:
I'm using SA 3.2.5 and sa-update but SA doesn't seem to be picking rules
up from /var/lib/spamassassin/
Can anyone advise what the problem might be and what diagnosis I can
perform?
The output of 'spamassassin --lint -D' might shed some light.
geoff.spamassass...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:59:11
+:
I'm using SA 3.2.5 and sa-update but SA doesn't seem to be picking rules
up from /var/lib/spamassassin/
Well, you listed a lot, but not any proof for what you think it *seems* not
to do.
Kai
--
Get your web at
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Geoff Soper
geoff.m...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote:
I've now added the saupdates.openprotect.com
channel which contains recommended SAREs rules and all is working!
I thought I read that no one should be using openprotect as it's
hoplessly out of date. ??
--
On 13/01/2010 13:46, Jason Bertoch wrote:
geoff.spamassass...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote:
I'm using SA 3.2.5 and sa-update but SA doesn't seem to be picking
rules up from /var/lib/spamassassin/
Can anyone advise what the problem might be and what diagnosis I can
perform?
The output of
On 13/01/2010 14:02, Shaun T. Erickson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Geoff Soper
geoff.m...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote:
I've now added the saupdates.openprotect.com
channel which contains recommended SAREs rules and all is working!
I thought I read that no one should be using
geoff.spamassass...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote:
On 13/01/2010 14:02, Shaun T. Erickson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Geoff Soper
geoff.m...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote:
I've now added the saupdates.openprotect.com
channel which contains recommended SAREs rules and all is working!
I
Jason Bertoch wrote:
geoff.spamassass...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote:
On 13/01/2010 14:02, Shaun T. Erickson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Geoff Soper
geoff.m...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote:
I've now added the saupdates.openprotect.com
channel which contains recommended SAREs rules and all
Can a list admin disable the spamassas...@hundredacrewood.willspc.net
account as we're still getting bounces?
Original Message
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:36:54 -0500
From: Administrator administra...@willspc.net
To: Jason Bertoch
Thanks for that, can you point me in the direction of some info on the
90_2tld.cf.sare.sa-update.dostech.net channel? I found
http://taint.org/2007/08/15/004348a.html in relation to
sought.rules.yerp.org
Thanks,
Geoff
On 13/01/2010 14:35, Jason Bertoch wrote:
Jason Bertoch wrote:
geoff.spamassass...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote:
Thanks for that, can you point me in the direction of some info on the
90_2tld.cf.sare.sa-update.dostech.net channel? I found
http://taint.org/2007/08/15/004348a.html in relation to
sought.rules.yerp.org
Info is included in the file itself:
#
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:39:34 -0500
Jason Bertoch ja...@i6ix.com wrote:
Can a list admin disable the spamassas...@hundredacrewood.willspc.net
account as we're still getting bounces?
Original Message
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010
SpamAssassin Server version 3.2.5
running on Perl 5.8.8
with zlib support (Compress::Zlib 2.011)
SunOS ornl72 5.9 Generic_122300-07 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-V240
What causes the following error message when restarting spamd?
perl: warning: Setting locale failed.
perl: warning: Please check
On Wed 13 Jan 2010 02:53:13 PM CET, Geoff Soper wrote
saupdates.openprotect.com channel which contains recommended SAREs
rules and all is working!
outdated sare rules is not recommended, and openprotect do care ? :)
if you update sare rules via sa-update it would work, if you do some
On 13/01/2010 15:03, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Wed 13 Jan 2010 02:53:13 PM CET, Geoff Soper wrote
saupdates.openprotect.com channel which contains recommended SAREs
rules and all is working!
outdated sare rules is not recommended, and openprotect do care ? :)
if you update sare rules via
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:39:34 -0500
Jason Bertoch ja...@i6ix.com wrote:
Can a list admin disable the spamassas...@hundredacrewood.willspc.net
account as we're still getting bounces?
On 13.01.10 14:49, Christian Brel wrote:
I found dropping the whole: 66.192.0.0/14 in iptables solved this
Geoff Soper wrote:
OK, I'm slightly confused as to what the advice is here. Is there
consensus on SAREs? Should I still use them (via the channel list
described at http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/SareChannels ) or is it
better not to use them? I get the impression that there is consensus
On Wed 13 Jan 2010 04:11:45 PM CET, Geoff Soper wrote
I'll certainly add sought.rules.yerp.org and
90_2tld.cf.sare.sa-update.dostech.net to updates.spamassassin.org as
suggested by Jason.
delete all files in the 3.2.5 sa update dir, use sa-update again
so all sa-update rules gets loaded,
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:17:31 +0100
Matus UHLAR - fantomas uh...@fantomas.sk wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:39:34 -0500
Jason Bertoch ja...@i6ix.com wrote:
Can a list admin disable the
spamassas...@hundredacrewood.willspc.net account as we're still
getting bounces?
On 13.01.10
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Geoff Soper
geoff.m...@alphaworks.co.uk wrote:
OK, I'm slightly confused as to what the advice is here. Is there consensus
on SAREs? Should I still use them (via the channel list described at
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/SareChannels ) or is it better
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
In the thread:
http://osdir.com/ml/debian-bugs-closed/2009-08/msg01318.html
Error code 98 is described as the message being fed being to big
Documentation aside, why are you passing such messages to SA in the first
place? I'd recommend adding a
John Hardin jhar...@impsec.org writes:
In the thread:
http://osdir.com/ml/debian-bugs-closed/2009-08/msg01318.html
Error code 98 is described as the message being fed being to big
Documentation aside, why are you passing such messages to SA in the
first place? I'd recommend adding a
I'm not sure -- I've seen that (generally with UTF-8 locales). I
think it may be missing locale data in the OS install.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 14:53, Rosenbaum, Larry M. rosenbau...@ornl.gov wrote:
SpamAssassin Server version 3.2.5
running on Perl 5.8.8
with zlib support (Compress::Zlib
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
John Hardin jhar...@impsec.org writes:
In the thread:
http://osdir.com/ml/debian-bugs-closed/2009-08/msg01318.html
Error code 98 is described as the message being fed being to big
Documentation aside, why are you passing such messages to SA in
John Hardin jhar...@impsec.org writes:
How do I found out what the size limit is? And I still need the check,
because when the size limit changes (or the wrong one is used) you
will get the error.
Per man spamc:
-s max_size, --max-size=max_size
Set the maximum message size which
Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
SpamAssassin Server version 3.2.5
running on Perl 5.8.8
with zlib support (Compress::Zlib 2.011)
SunOS ornl72 5.9 Generic_122300-07 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-V240
What causes the following error message when restarting spamd?
perl: warning: Setting locale
Skaz wrote on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:54:58 -0800 (PST):
However
I will need to drop that restriction once I set up external mail access
what is external mail access ?
Kai
--
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
From: ConsumerInfo consumeri...@exprpt.com
I have now received TWO spams from them. I never to my knowledge signed
up anything with then with my email address.
They are now explicitly blacklisted here to get past hostkarma whitelist.
{^_^}
Thanks to all who've replied.
SPF won't catch this type of spam as that only deals with the envelope and the
faked field is in the body. We already have SPF set up anyhow which obviously
catches a fair few faked HELO's.
Kai's suggestion for Postfix will work for now, so thanks for that.
From: Christian Brel brel.spamassassin091...@copperproductions.co.uk
Sent: Wednesday, 2010/January/13 07:40
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:17:31 +0100
Matus UHLAR - fantomas uh...@fantomas.sk wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:39:34 -0500
Jason Bertoch ja...@i6ix.com wrote:
Can a list admin disable
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:11:49 +0100
Cecil Westerhof ce...@decebal.nl wrote:
John Hardin jhar...@impsec.org writes:
I'd suggest doing a size test and explicitly telling spamc to use
the same size limit.
That is the safest. ;-) Only problem could be maintainability.
The default value of
I'm a newbie to spamassassin, I installed it today on a raq550 running
strongbolt2 which uses sendmail v8.22. I see that spam's are now being
labelled [SPAM] in the subject line but what I want to do is block those
emails from getting to my inbox. What's the next step to refecting those
emails?
I do this but it only works for rejecting a forged envelope. It doesn't work if
it's only a forged From header which the example shows.
Does anyone know of a way to handle this type of scenario, where the envelope
From is valid and the From header is forged and typically matches the To header?
RW rwmailli...@googlemail.com writes:
I wonder why you are learning through spamc at all. IIRC you observered
that sa-learn was a little slower than in your previous SA version, you
tried spamc and found it to be slower and more trouble than using
sa-learn on a directory. sa-learn AFAIK has
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Skaz wrote on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:54:58 -0800 (PST):
However
I will need to drop that restriction once I set up external mail access
what is external mail access ?
It's mail access for all those externals out there. Here's a picture
of one:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Mike Wallace wrote:
: I do this but it only works for rejecting a forged envelope. It doesn't
: work if it's only a forged From header which the example shows.
:
: Does anyone know of a way to handle this type of scenario, where the
: envelope From is valid and the From
On 01/13/2010 07:22 PM, tonjg wrote:
I'm a newbie to spamassassin, I installed it today on a raq550 running
strongbolt2 which uses sendmail v8.22. I see that spam's are now being
labelled [SPAM] in the subject line but what I want to do is block those
emails from getting to my inbox. What's the
On 01/13/2010 07:22 PM, tonjg wrote:
thanks for your response Ned.
your last line describes exactly what I want to do - reject mail, do it at
the smtp stage in sendmail - but I don't know how to achieve this.
--
View this message in context:
tonjg wrote:
On 01/13/2010 07:22 PM, tonjg wrote:
thanks for your response Ned.
your last line describes exactly what I want to do - reject mail, do it at
the smtp stage in sendmail - but I don't know how to achieve this.
Take a look at the Sendmail section of this page:
Please.
Kai
--
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Tonjg wrote on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:22:00 -0800 (PST):
Note: I don't want to delete them or divert them to another folder, I'd like
to reject them in the same way the dnsbl lists do.
SA does not do this for you. You would need to use some milter or so.
Kai
--
Get your web at Conactive
yes thanks bowie I've managed to integrate SA into sendmail as per the link
you gave but that page has no instructions for how to get sendmail to reject
the spam.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/newbie%3A-configure-SA-to-reject-spam-tp27149042p27152771.html
Sent from the
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
SA does not do this for you. You would need to use some milter or so.
but I thought SA had a way of instructing sendmail to reject/drop the
spam...
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/newbie%3A-configure-SA-to-reject-spam-tp27149042p27152807.html
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, tonjg wrote:
: thanks for your response Ned.
: your last line describes exactly what I want to do - reject mail, do it at
: the smtp stage in sendmail - but I don't know how to achieve this.
Welcome!
Permit me to state what may be considered 'obvious' to many, but which may
tonjg wrote:
On 01/13/2010 07:22 PM, tonjg wrote:
thanks for your response Ned.
your last line describes exactly what I want to do - reject mail, do it at
the smtp stage in sendmail - but I don't know how to achieve this.
Call spamassassin from within a milter. I use Mimedefang, but there
Mike Grau wrote:
Call spamassassin from within a milter.
I'm sorry to be the dumb newbie but how does one call spamassassin from
within a milter?
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/newbie%3A-configure-SA-to-reject-spam-tp27149042p27153159.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin
Charles Gregory wrote:
If you are able to scan the mail *during* the SMTP (sendmail) process, you
can issue an 'exit code' to sendmail that will cause sendmail to 'reject'
the mail,
that's exactly what I want, but I can't find any instructions how to do it.
--
View this message in
On Wed 13 Jan 2010 05:54:58 PM CET, Skaz wrote
Sadly SPF won't catch this type of spam as that only deals with the envelope
and the faked field is in the body. We already have SPF set up anyhow which
obviously catches a fair few faked HELO's.
ug :/
On Wed 13 Jan 2010 08:39:13 PM CET, Mike Wallace wrote
I do this but it only works for rejecting a forged envelope. It
doesn't work if it's only a forged From header which the example
shows.
and you get spam from spf pass domains where From: is spf fail ?
Does anyone know of a way to
I'm not seeing any yet but expecting it soon.
On 13.01.10 14:51, Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm not seeing any yet but expecting it soon.
got some rules to catch is before it starts spreading?
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, tonjg wrote:
yes thanks bowie I've managed to integrate SA into sendmail as per the link
you gave but that page has no instructions for how to get sendmail to reject
the spam.
tonjg
The link that Bowie gave you lists several different ways to integrate SA
into sendmail.
Tonjg wrote on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:57:53 -0800 (PST):
yes thanks bowie I've managed to integrate SA into sendmail as per the link
you gave but that page has no instructions for how to get sendmail to reject
the spam.
Then look in the documentation for that unknown tool that you used to
Mike Wallace wrote on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:39:13 -0500:
I do this but it only works for rejecting a forged envelope. It doesn't
work if it's only a forged From header which the example shows.
Yes, it doesn't work if only the From is forged. You could compare To and
From in SA and disallow if
Hi
Mail system is made of
Sendmail as MTA - spamass-milter - spamd
Legitimate users are using the sendmail server over TLS and first need
to authenticate themselves before being able to post.
Is there a way to have a particular score if the sender has
succesfully authenticated ?
Like if the
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Skaz wrote on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:54:58 -0800 (PST):
However I will need to drop that restriction once I set up external
mail access
what is external mail access ?
Employees sending email from offsite, I would assume.
Hopefully postfix can be
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote:
Mail system is made of
Sendmail as MTA - spamass-milter - spamd
Legitimate users are using the sendmail server over TLS and first need
to authenticate themselves before being able to post.
Is there a way to have a particular score if the sender
Hello,
Am 2010-01-13 14:51:56, schrieb Marc Perkel:
I'm not seeing any yet but expecting it soon.
I have read it in the FBI news for a hour.
Not a singel one in any of my mailboxes yet...
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Electronic
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote:
Mail system is made of
Sendmail as MTA - spamass-milter - spamd
Legitimate users are using the sendmail server over TLS and first need
to authenticate themselves before being able to post.
Is
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Jason Bertoch wrote:
Can a list admin disable the spamassas...@hundredacrewood.willspc.net
account as we're still getting bounces?
Original Message
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:36:54 -0500
From:
Hi
2010/1/14 John Hardin jhar...@impsec.org:
Take a look at the Received header that your MTA inserts for an
authenticated session. It will look something like this:
Thanks for the hint..
I had a try with adding a hydrix.cf file containing:
header AUTH_SMTP Received =~ /\(authenticated
Hi there
2010/1/14 David B Funk dbf...@engineering.uiowa.edu:
A caveat, as you're using sendmail with a milter, be aware that the milter
taps into the mail stream -before- the local sendmail Received header is
added. Therefore the milter has to synthesize the Received header
itself (to mimic
On 13/01/2010 9:29 PM, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote:
Hi
Mail system is made of
Sendmail as MTA - spamass-milter - spamd
Legitimate users are using the sendmail server over TLS and first need
to authenticate themselves before being able to post.
Is there a way to have a particular score if
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
On 13/01/2010 9:29 PM, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote:
Hi
Mail system is made of
Sendmail as MTA - spamass-milter - spamd
Legitimate users are using the sendmail server over TLS and first need
to authenticate themselves before being able to
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Jason Bertoch wrote:
Can a list admin disable the spamassas...@hundredacrewood.willspc.net
account as we're still getting bounces?
[...]
From: Administrator administra...@willspc.net
On 13.01.10 22:41, David B Funk wrote:
Just added the following to my SA rules:
#
68 matches
Mail list logo
