Hi,
when running spamc to learn/unlearn, I get this:
Fri Jan 29 10:00:01 2010 [9855] info: spamd: got connection over
/var/run/spamd/socket
Fri Jan 29 10:00:01 2010 [9855] warn: Use of uninitialized value $start_time
in addition (+) at /usr/bin/spamd line 1382, GEN4747 line 47.
Fri Jan 29
On Friday January 29 2010 10:53:21 Jakob Hirsch wrote:
when running spamc to learn/unlearn, I get this:
Fri Jan 29 10:00:01 2010 [9855] warn: Use of
uninitialized value $start_time in addition (+) at /usr/bin/spamd line
1382, GEN4747 line 47.
It's not too bad, but it's not good either.
Anyway, what you are doing here is penalizing all users of that
company's copper wires. No amount of monopoly breakup legislation will
do any good if you penalize based on the wrong part of the physical
infrastructure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier
please stop spamming this list with this explitive deleted any longer,
thanks. If you have grieve take it up with the folks how are responsible,
that is the folks *using* the rules and *making* the rules.
Kai
--
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
On Thursday 28 January 2010 14:40:56 Graham Murray wrote:
Since upgrading to SA 3.3.0, botnet (version 0.8) is showing a false
positive on every email I receive via IPv6.
Has anyone contacted the author?
A sample header field:
Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org
McDonald, Dan wrote:
Please excuse the top-post. This truly brain-damaged mua does not
allow me to edit the body.
Easiest way to disable whitelists is:
grep -E score\ RCVD.+-
/var/lib/spamassassin/updates_spamassassin_org/50_scores.cf | cut -d\
-f1-3
* Strictly for fun. Cuz I'm a geek and can't resist..
The code you post could not produce the output shown.
There is no 'reject' in the line 'Relay access denied'. (big wide grin)
No argument about the intended *point* of the output. :)
- C
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010, LuKreme wrote:
$
ram wrote:
The rules in /usr/share/spamassassin are the original rules from the
install. If /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002.005 exists, those rules
will be
used instead. You can verify which rules are being used by
running this
command:
$ spamassassin
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 09:18 -0500, Bowie Bailey wrote:
McDonald, Dan wrote:
Please excuse the top-post. This truly brain-damaged mua does not
allow me to edit the body.
Easiest way to disable whitelists is:
grep -E score\ RCVD.+-
Charles Gregory wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010, LuKreme wrote:
$ bzgrep dynamic.hinet.net /var/log/maillog.?.bz2 |\
grep -i reject |\
awk -F: {'print $9'} |\
awk -F';' {'print $1'} |\
sort -u
Client host rejected
Helo command rejected
Recipient address rejected
Relay access
On 1/28/2010 10:20 PM, René Berber wrote:
Now using re2c 13.5 same problem, to be precise it doesn't hang, it
loops (the CPU usage goes up and down, RSS the same, up and down) at the
same point.
Here's the output http://pastebin.com/m438000e0
Assuming you recompiled your rules after the
Daniel J McDonald wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 09:18 -0500, Bowie Bailey wrote:
McDonald, Dan wrote:
Please excuse the top-post. This truly brain-damaged mua does not
allow me to edit the body.
Easiest way to disable whitelists is:
grep -E score\ RCVD.+-
Mark Martinec wrote:
On Thursday 28 January 2010 14:40:56 Graham Murray wrote:
Since upgrading to SA 3.3.0, botnet (version 0.8) is showing a false
positive on every email I receive via IPv6.
Has anyone contacted the author?
As most here on the list know: Good luck with that. From what
On Friday 29 January 2010 04:20:15 René Berber wrote:
Jason Bertoch wrote:
What version of re2c are you using? Can you post the output of
'spamassassin -D --lint' to pastebin?
Now using re2c 1.3.5 same problem, to be precise it doesn't hang, it
loops (the CPU usage goes up and down, RSS
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 14:59, Mark Martinec mark.martinec...@ijs.si wrote:
On Friday 29 January 2010 04:20:15 René Berber wrote:
Jason Bertoch wrote:
What version of re2c are you using? Can you post the output of
'spamassassin -D --lint' to pastebin?
Now using re2c 1.3.5 same problem, to
On 29-Jan-2010, at 07:20, Charles Gregory wrote:
* Strictly for fun. Cuz I'm a geek and can't resist..
The code you post could not produce the output shown.
Yes it could because it DID
There is no 'reject' in the line 'Relay access denied'. (big wide grin)
Jan 28 14:12:58 mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bowie Bailey wrote:
ram wrote:
iam still in confuse, how can i fine tune sitewide rules to send all
the users to send spam mails to one user ID
and configure rule to calculate based on that user
If you are talking about the bayes database,
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Bowie Bailey wrote:
Take another look. The original line must contain 'reject', but the
output is not the entire line.
Awk. (as an exclamation) :)
- C
Jason Bertoch wrote:
On 1/28/2010 10:20 PM, René Berber wrote:
Now using re2c 13.5 same problem, to be precise it doesn't hang, it
loops (the CPU usage goes up and down, RSS the same, up and down) at the
same point.
Here's the output http://pastebin.com/m438000e0
Assuming you
On Friday 29 January 2010 11:50:25 Mark Martinec wrote:
On Friday January 29 2010 10:53:21 Jakob Hirsch wrote:
when running spamc to learn/unlearn, I get this:
Fri Jan 29 10:00:01 2010 [9855] warn: Use of
uninitialized value $start_time in addition (+)
at /usr/bin/spamd line 1382,
LuKreme wrote:
I get hundreds and hundreds of spam attempts from dynamic.hinet.net
$ bzgrep dynamic.hinet.net /var/log/maillog.?.bz2 | grep -i reject |wc -l
8939
That's in 10 days. Nearly 900 times a day.
Thank you LuKreme, you have proven my point.
I have a good number too, though
Could I get someone to run an example of smut spam I cannot seem to
block in SA 3.2.5? This is a typical message that has been hammering one
or two customers and despite learning many of these messages with bayes,
still they continue...
http://mx1.webtent.net/test.msg
I am using Sanesecurity as
Hello all,
This mail http://pastebin.com/m3d60d066 was generated automatically by
my gmail calendar as a reminder message.
Clearly it doesn't trip the spam-o-meter (scores 0.2), but I have a
procmail recipe the puts ANY_BOUNCE_MESSAGE into a quarantine folder.
I can't for the life of me work
Message original
Sujet : Re: how can i finetune to spamassassin to handle spams
De : Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com
Pour : users@spamassassin.apache.org
Date : 2010-01-29 09:28
ram wrote:
The rules in /usr/share/spamassassin are the original rules from the
Justin Mason wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 14:59, Mark Martinec mark.martinec...@ijs.si wrote:
On Friday 29 January 2010 04:20:15 René Berber wrote:
Jason Bertoch wrote:
What version of re2c are you using? Can you post the output of
'spamassassin -D --lint' to pastebin?
Now using re2c
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:09:49 -0500
Robert Fitzpatrick li...@webtent.net wrote:
Could I get someone to run an example of smut spam I cannot seem to
block in SA 3.2.5? This is a typical message that has been hammering
one or two customers and despite learning many of these messages with
bayes,
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 16:19 +, Christian Brel wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:09:49 -0500
Robert Fitzpatrick li...@webtent.net wrote:
Could I get someone to run an example of smut spam I cannot seem to
block in SA 3.2.5? This is a typical message that has been hammering
one or two
Eddy Beliveau wrote:
Hi!
Interesting subject... which make me checked my 3.3.0 installation
I did update spamassassin to version 3.3.0
Then I erased /var/lib/spamassassin/*
did a sa-update --verbose
/Update available for channel updates.spamassassin.org
Update was available, and was
I've recently started receiving web form spam, but I'm not quite
sure what to make of it.
My websites contains a couple of support request forms that ask for
minimal information (business name, name, phone, problem, email
address).
Recently, I've started receiving forms that contain
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:43:02 -0800
Bill Landry b...@inetmsg.com wrote:
Mark Martinec wrote:
On Thursday 28 January 2010 14:40:56 Graham Murray wrote:
Since upgrading to SA 3.3.0, botnet (version 0.8) is showing a
false positive on every email I receive via IPv6.
Has anyone contacted
- te...@cnysupport.com wrote:
I've recently started receiving web form spam, but I'm not quite
sure what to make of it.
My websites contains a couple of support request forms that ask for
minimal information (business name, name, phone, problem, email
address).
Recently, I've
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 16:19 +, Christian Brel wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:09:49 -0500
Robert Fitzpatrick li...@webtent.net wrote:
Could I get someone to run an example of smut spam I cannot seem to
block in SA 3.2.5? This is a typical message that has been
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:28:31 -0500
Robert Fitzpatrick li...@webtent.net wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 16:19 +, Christian Brel wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:09:49 -0500
Robert Fitzpatrick li...@webtent.net wrote:
Could I get someone to run an example of smut spam I cannot seem
to
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:09 -0500, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
Could I get someone to run an example of smut spam I cannot seem to
block in SA 3.2.5? This is a typical message that has been hammering one
or two customers and despite learning many of these messages with bayes,
still they
Quoting --[ UxBoD ]-- ux...@splatnix.net:
- te...@cnysupport.com wrote:
I've recently started receiving web form spam, but I'm not quite
sure what to make of it.
. . .
Recently, I've started receiving forms that contain random keyboard
letters that look like they were typed by a
On 1/29/2010 12:44 PM, te...@cnysupport.com wrote:
Really, I was just trying to figure out what the point would be for
someone to fill out the form with obviously invalid data.
My guess is that it's a spammer's bot looking for a broken web form to
abuse.
I've been getting 2 or 3 of these daily. The mail address typically
matches the name put in, it's always a gmail address, and so far, it's
always been a bad mail address.
It's more an annoyance than a problem, my mailing program sends out a
confirm, and when it bounces, I remove the bogus
Jason Bertoch wrote:
On 1/29/2010 12:44 PM, te...@cnysupport.com wrote:
Really, I was just trying to figure out what the point would be for
someone to fill out the form with obviously invalid data.
My guess is that it's a spammer's bot looking for a broken web form to
abuse.
Many web
Quoting Jay Plesset j...@dp-design.com:
I've been getting 2 or 3 of these daily. The mail address typically
matches the name put in, it's always a gmail address, and so far,
it's always been a bad mail address.
It's more an annoyance than a problem, my mailing program sends out a
confirm,
Quoting James Butler ja...@musicforhumans.com:
Jason Bertoch wrote:
On 1/29/2010 12:44 PM, te...@cnysupport.com wrote:
Really, I was just trying to figure out what the point would be for
someone to fill out the form with obviously invalid data.
My guess is that it's a spammer's bot
McDonald, Dan wrote:
grep -E score\ RCVD.+-
/var/lib/spamassassin/updates_spamassassin_org/50_scores.cf | cut -d\
-f1-3 /etc/mail/spamassassin/no-whitelists.cf
Nice. Now I just need to decide if I wait for ports to update or just manually
install 3.3
--
You try to shape the world to
Message original
Sujet : Re: how can i finetune to spamassassin to handle spams (not
latest 72_active.cf)
De : Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com
Pour : users@spamassassin.apache.org
Date : 2010-01-29 11:30
Eddy Beliveau wrote:
Hi!
Interesting subject... which make me
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, te...@cnysupport.com wrote:
little uncomfortable making the form submit any more complicated than
necessary, since the people who use it are generally already stressed, and
I'd prefer to not make them decipher swirly letters.
I find that most form-fillers are robots and
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, James Butler wrote:
. Gibberish in the form is just a probe.
My experience has been that the gibberish gets around simplistic tests for
'empty' fields. That's why I advocate the use of a field that *should* be
empty. :)
- C
raq550 running strongbolt 2, spamassassin.i386 0:3.2.5-1.el4
I get the following error when trying to do a an sa-learn command:
bayes: bayes db version 0 is not able to be used, aborting! at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.5/Mail
/SpamAssassin/BayesStore/DBM.pm line 196.
Is there a fix for this?
Arthur Dent wrote:
This mail http://pastebin.com/m3d60d066 was generated automatically
by my gmail calendar as a reminder message.
Clearly it doesn't trip the spam-o-meter (scores 0.2), but I have a
procmail recipe the puts ANY_BOUNCE_MESSAGE into a quarantine
folder.
I recommend altering
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
http://mx1.webtent.net/test.msg
http://mx1.webtent.net/test2.msg
The first one now also hits razor ... can't say one way or another
about how it hit earlier, but I'd suggest double-checking to ensure
you use the plugin as it's pretty useful across the board.
I
Charles Gregory wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, James Butler wrote:
. Gibberish in the form is just a probe.
My experience has been that the gibberish gets around simplistic tests
for 'empty' fields. That's why I advocate the use of a field that
*should* be empty. :)
- C
Great idea. Works
Just try it out. You will find that the detection rate
without SARE is excellent and there's likely no benefit from
SARE. Most SARE are well outdated. This applies to 3.2.5 as well.
Kai
Kai
i appreciate your input, yet i really wanted Warren to answer for his blog
post on it in
Firstly, the instructions for reading this e-mail: please read it whole,
and understand that (although it may sound harsh at places) I am actually
trying to help you. Only then reply (if needed). It is also somewhat long,
but it does contain some technical info (and not only my rants :) Thanks.
Workaround: remove the __AUTO_GEN_AS|| from the
__BOUNCE_AUTO_GENERATED meta rule in 20_vbounce.cf which you can find
on your server via:
*Never* edit stock rule files, unless absolutely necessary. And please
never give that advice either. :)
score __AUTO_GEN_AS 0
in your local.cf or
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 21:23 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Workaround: remove the __AUTO_GEN_AS|| from the
__BOUNCE_AUTO_GENERATED meta rule in 20_vbounce.cf which you can find
on your server via:
*Never* edit stock rule files, unless absolutely necessary. And please
never give that
On Jan 28, 2010, at 11:52 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
I wasn't planning on responding to this thread, but other positive responses
have annoyed me.
There were positive responses?
--
J.D. Falk jdf...@returnpath.net
Return Path Inc
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 21:41 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 21:23 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Workaround: remove the __AUTO_GEN_AS|| from the
__BOUNCE_AUTO_GENERATED meta rule in 20_vbounce.cf which you can find
on your server via:
*Never* edit stock
On Sat, 2010-01-23 at 18:40 -0800, Robert Hanson wrote:
Yes, complaining instead of notifying the right people. Way to go!
karsten,
woooh!
you are welcome! :-)
since i dont know who it is, what do you expect?
From a bunch of mail admins?
To contact LIST-owner@ [1] and summon
On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 19:09 +0100, wolfgang wrote:
In an older episode (Sunday, 24. January 2010), Evan Platt wrote:
On 1/23/2010 11:56 AM, wolfgang wrote:
I sent an unsubscription request for the address in question to
users-ow...@spamassassin.apache.org.
Won't work, AFAIK. You need
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 12:39 -0500, Alex wrote:
The rules in /usr/share/spamassassin are the original rules from the
install. If /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002.005 exists, those rules will be
used instead. You can verify which rules are being used by running this
command:
Is this order
Am 29.01.2010 19:56, schrieb tonjg:
raq550 running strongbolt 2, spamassassin.i386 0:3.2.5-1.el4
I get the following error when trying to do a an sa-learn command:
bayes: bayes db version 0 is not able to be used, aborting! at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.5/Mail
Quoting Andy Dorman ador...@ironicdesign.com:
Today (Friday) around 1600 GMT, Jan 29, we experienced a large drop
(almost 50%) in spam connections. And since then we have seen anywhere
from 25% to 40% less spam volume than is normal.
Anyone else see something similar? From what we have
Quoting Andy Dorman ador...@ironicdesign.com:
Today (Friday) around 1600 GMT, Jan 29, we experienced a large drop
(almost 50%) in spam connections. And since then we have seen anywhere
from 25% to 40% less spam volume than is normal.
Anyone else see something similar? From what we have
http://www.returnpath.net/blog/2010/01/spamassasin-rarely-misses.php
Yeah, it's partly self-serving, but that's what corporate
blogs are for. The people who read this blog are mostly
marketers with very little exposure to the open source
community, so this should help them
All my userprefs are stored in SQL so I dont want a ~/.spamassassin
directory.
(My earlier version (3.1.7) did not attempt to do this.)
I'm running spamd from rc.conf with spamd_flags=-Q -x -d -m 10
The attempt to create this directory results in
Insecure dependency in mkdir while running
Hi,
used instead. You can verify which rules are being used by running this
command:
Is this order documented anywhere?
man spamassassin
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/FrontPage
Internal Server Error
Not sure what the deal is with that link, but the page you're
referring to
On 01/30/2010 04:27 PM, Andy Dorman wrote:
Today (Friday) around 1600 GMT, Jan 29, we experienced a large drop
(almost 50%) in spam connections. And since then we have seen
anywhere from 25% to 40% less spam volume than is normal.
Anyone else see something similar? From what we have seen,
64 matches
Mail list logo
