On 05/09/2011 1:32 AM, Michael Monnerie wrote:
On Samstag, 12. Februar 2011 Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Something might be wedged in that channel generation... I'll have to
look.
Hi Daryl,
referring to that old mail, I also only see that old 2010-08 config of
ZMI_GERMAN. I'm the maintainer
On 09/06/2011 5:09 AM, Alessandro Dentella wrote:
Hi,
I find a lot of spam that has already passed other spam-filters with
spamassassin better tuned than mine an already have a X-Spam-Flag to YES.
I tried to add a rule to match that case:
header CUSTOM_X_SPAM_FLAG X-Spam-Flag =~
On 09/06/2011 10:26 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 04:08:08 +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 22:00:09 -0400, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
header CUSTOM_X_SPAM_FLAG ALL:raw =~ /\bX-Spam-Flag: YES\b/i
aol have left out the space before YES
will test it and report
Something might be wedged in that channel generation... I'll have to look.
Daryl
On 11/02/2011 4:26 AM, C.M. Burns wrote:
Hi list,
what happend to channel 70_zmi_german.cf.zmi.sa-update.dostech.net ?
is this not being updated anymore although still advertised on
On 02/01/2011 11:30 AM, Marc Perkel wrote:
Here's a wild idea that might prove a point. Create a set of meta rules
which is a combination of every set of two rules.
meta COMBO_RULE1_RULE2 (RULE1 RULE2)
describe COMBO_RULE1_RULE2 RULE1 and RULE2
score COMBO_RULE1_RULE2 0.1
Then run stats to
On 30/10/2010 4:28 AM, Yet Another Ninja wrote:
rsync? to check mail?
Hrm, not a bad idea for the basis of a bayesian filter.
Daryl
On 30/10/2010 1:12 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
In the last two network mass checks, today and a week ago, only 3.1% and
3.4%, respectively, of the corpora has been spam. Why?
I had an IBM Deathstar go on me. Although I thought it had, moving my
mail spool and personal home directory
On 22/06/2010 10:52 AM, Henrique Fernandes wrote:
It is safe to use spamassassin tmpdir on a tmpfs mounted system ?
Yes it's safe.
And if its safe it would have a better performance ?
Potentially. If you've got memory free for it, it certainly shouldn't
perform worse.
Daryl
On 30/05/2010 7:06 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Sat, 29 May 2010, Illó Gábor wrote:
And you have any idea for this?
May 29 21:06:38 mail spamd[88295]: rules: meta test
ADVANCE_FEE_3_NEW_FORM
has dependency 'ADVANCE_FEE_3_NEW' with a zero score
May 29 21:06:38 mail spamd[88295]: rules: meta
On 16/05/2010 7:53 AM, Yves Goergen wrote:
On 16.05.2010 12:13 CE(S)T, C.M. Burns wrote:
I suppose you have problems with the key #856AA88A.
Yes, that was it.
If you imported it to your keyring, try this:
sa-update --channel 70_zmi_german.cf.zmi.sa-update.dostech.net --gpgkey
856AA88A
On 25/03/2010 5:04 PM, Clayton Keller wrote:
I have run into a snag.
The release notes for 3.3.0 indicate that Mail::SPF::Query is no longer
used.
I have been using the pypolicyd-spf package from openspf.org, which
required python-spf to be installed to take advantage of their module.
On 25/03/2010 12:35 PM, John Wilcock wrote:
I've seen a few FPs on this rule from genuine ham sent by one of my
colleagues using Thunderbird 3.0.4 - not all her mail, but specifically
replies to certain messages with UTF-8 encoding.
Anyone else seeing this?
Can you share samples in a bug
On 25/03/2010 2:26 PM, Michael Scheidell wrote:
yes, somehow the sender was in spamcop rbl, and the nightly sa-update
keeps up to date with 72_active.cf rule..
but, maybe a score of 5.3 is pretty high for ONE rule?
(
KHOP_SC_TOP200 is 3.9. but since its in the spamcop database, you add
On 25/03/2010 5:37 PM, Clayton Keller wrote:
On 3/25/2010 4:25 PM, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
On 25/03/2010 5:04 PM, Clayton Keller wrote:
I have run into a snag.
The release notes for 3.3.0 indicate that Mail::SPF::Query is no longer
used.
I have been using the pypolicyd-spf package from
On 25/03/2010 6:03 PM, Clayton Keller wrote:
On 3/25/2010 4:58 PM, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Hrm. It looks like they're still there. I actually don't see that
support for Mail::SPF::Query has been dropped.
Daryl
Ok, that's what I was seeing as well. Thank you for confirming that for me
On 25/03/2010 7:33 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
Was there any decisions regarding the deprecation of the use of
Mail::SPF::Query that has been tossed around? I will admit I have not
looked through any bug report requests regarding this at all.
I haven't either. Hopefully Mark or someone else
On 20/03/2010 12:34 PM, Michael Scheidell wrote:
O
http://www.takeyellow.com/
But the mirror is also there:
http://www.takeyellow.com/apachemirror/
I agree that combination looks fishy first. But I rather think that this
I think I would worry about the integrety of a mirror like
On 19/03/2010 2:34 PM, Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 3/19/10 12:31 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
Release Notes -- Apache SpamAssassin -- Version 3.3.1
I clicked on the download and got redirected (hijacked)? to this site:
On 19/03/2010 8:34 PM, Chris wrote:
SA3.3.0, just a general question, I've noticed that over the past six
days that during my 01:11 sa-update cronjob that the complete default
rulesets are being updated. The file names are in fact changing,
ie..922182.tar.gz, 922507.tar.gz and so forth, just
On 15/03/2010 11:07 PM, j wrote:
I've been having the same problem from several locations/ISPs, since
mid-Saturday.
500 Can't connect to yerp.org:80 (connect: timeout)
Dave
Anyone figure this out? I have received the same yerp.org down errors and
it's
screwing up my SA royally. I guess
On 26/02/2010 7:13 AM, Lee Dilkie wrote:
Folks,
I'm getting a parse error when I run sa-update to pick up the latest
ruleset (3.3? from updates.spamassassin.org.
Are you still having this issue?
$ sa-update --allowplugins --nogpg --channel updates.spamassassin.org
Wow. That's an
On 23/02/2010 7:51 PM, Dave Pooser wrote:
2) whitelist_auth is worth its weight in platinum
Damn! I knew that should have been a subscription only feature! ;)
On 19/02/2010 12:37 PM, Ben DJ wrote:
2010/2/15 Daryl C. W. O'Shea spamassas...@dostech.ca:
Yeah. That'll be corrected RSN.
Great. Atm,
dig +short -t TXT 1.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org
903765
Just to be clear, this^^^ will be the channel used by spamassassin's
sa-update from SVN
On 15/02/2010 8:11 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 09:35 -0800, Ben DJ wrote:
I've installed,
spamassassin -V
SpamAssassin version 3.3.1-r905461
running on Perl version 5.10.0
Attempts to pull rules from updates.spamassassin.org, (1),
On 13/02/2010 6:35 PM, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
$ sa-update
http: GET http://daryl.dostech.ca/sa-update/asf/909775.tar.gz request failed:
404 Not Found
There was an issue on the source host that has since been resolved.
Daryl
On 01/02/2010 6:51 PM, Adam Katz wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
The DNS entries for this channel lack version noting as well:
People shouldn't be just adding channels at whim. They should read the
documentation. If they try to use a channel that's not going to work
sa-update won't install
On 18/01/2010 1:05 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
How About:
As the per-seat costs for any available commercial spamfilter solution
exceed the margin for a retail Internet service account, SpamAssassin
is the only spamfilter solution usable by ISPs
Nothing like the truth, eh? ;-)
I'm sure
We've delayed when we're going to do the press release so I'm still open
to (and looking for) quotes for use in the press release.
Please send quotes my way... it's a good way to get free publicity for
your organization.
Daryl
On 17/01/2010 4:45 PM, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Hi All,
I'm
On 17/01/2010 4:05 PM, tonjg wrote:
Herbert J. Skuhra wrote:
You can set use_bayes and bayes_auto_learn to 1 in your local.cf.
so if there is no 'use_bayes' entry in local.cf does that mean bayes is
disabled by default?
No, bayes is enabled by default provided that you have any required
Hi All,
I'm putting together a press release for our upcoming release of Apache
SpamAssassin 3.3.0, our first major code release since the release of
3.2.0 in May 2007 and our first code release since the release of 3.2.5
in June 2008 (we've been doing periodic rule updates since then).
I am
On 15/01/2010 11:42 AM, Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
Yesterday one of our servers started having problems. I found the following
messages in the syslog file:
Jan 14 14:12:38 localhost spamd[20926]: spamd: respawning server at
/usr/local/bin/spamd line 1080.
Jan 14 14:12:38 localhost
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 04/01/2010 2:05 AM, Mathias Homann wrote:
... is a fix for that out through sa-update now?
then why am i not getting it?
my channels for sa-update:
saupdates.openprotect.com
updates.spamassassin.org
70_zmi_german.cf.zmi.sa-update.dostech.net
any hints?
saupdates.openprotect.com
On 02/01/2010 7:38 AM, Martin wrote:
Ran sa-update twice and no new update available as yet!
Perhaps you're system has already updated itself? Rule update version
895075 is the current version.
Daryl
I'm investigating why now. The root cause I know... that mirror blew a
power supply last night, so I moved it to a new server in a hurry at
midnight. Apparently I messed up the config somewhere.
Anywho... it's now working. Not the way I would like it to, but how it
wants to.
Daryl
On
SpamAssassin Users' list. Users' mailing list info is here. [4]
On behalf of the Apache SpamAssassin project I apologize for this error
and the grief it may have caused you.
Regards,
Daryl C. W. O'Shea
VP, Apache SpamAssassin
[1] http://spamassassin.apache.org/
[2] http://wiki.apache.org
On 19/12/2009 3:20 PM, Alban Deniz wrote:
I would like to know if there's a way to report dynamic scores in
SpamAssassin 3.1.7. I haven't been able to find info for this on the FAQ
or on the FrontPage.
If I recall correctly the only way to do it is to access the score hash
of the $permsgstatus
On 19/12/2009 11:23 AM, R-Elists wrote:
i would encourage other SA team members to have a wish list and publish.
A number of committers have have added Amazon wishlists to the CREDITS
file included with the distribution. The most up-to-date version is
available on our website [1] by clicking
On 19/12/2009 5:51 PM, Charles Gregory wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Warren Togami wrote:
Why wait, when you do relatively simple things to help make it happen?
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/NightlyMassCheck
We can more frequently update rules if more people participate in the
nightly
On 18/12/2009 3:09 AM, LuKreme wrote:
On 18-Dec-2009, at 00:24, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
From the data we have from mass-checks we are erring a very small amount
on the side of caution by not disabling the whitelists by default.
I guess that the real issue that I have with the whole
On 18/12/2009 3:32 AM, Christian Brel wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 02:24:45 -0500
Daryl C. W. O'Shea spamassas...@dostech.ca wrote:
Reputation type rules (such as DNSWLs) are probably the only (or
certainly one of the very few) types of rules that you can weight
heavily negatively
On 18/12/2009 2:58 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Jason Bertoch wrote:
John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Jason Bertoch wrote:
Charles Gregory wrote:
If a spammer gets an IP blacklisted, at the least DNSWL and
HABEAS
should make note of this and remove the
On 18/12/2009 5:13 PM, Warren Togami wrote:
On 12/18/2009 04:56 PM, Charles Gregory wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, John Hardin wrote:
We hope to get rule scoring and publication much more automated -
i.e., if a rule in the sandbox works well based on the automated
masschecks, it would be
On 18/12/2009 4:46 PM, Charles Gregory wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, jdow wrote:
I suppose it's not a whole lot of bother to change the 3.2 scores.
But, people who feel they have been bitten with a HABEAS score have
probably already overridden them.
Again, I make a note that my concern is for
On 18/12/2009 8:35 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
If we had more mass-check data from a wider number of mail recipients
maybe it would change things, statistically, maybe it wouldn't. New
mass-check contributors are always welcome. They take very little
effort to manage
On 18/12/2009 2:44 PM, Rob McEwen wrote:
R-Elists wrote:
here is a chance for possible help in more areas than just this specific
ruleset issue...
i asked Rob some time ago if he could write a script that would check logs
and report if a certain rule was effective or not by itself vrs if
On 17/12/2009 1:00 PM, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
Sometimes sa-update works, sometimes one gets
http: GET http://daryl.dostech.ca/sa-update/asf/891585.tar.gz request failed:
403 Forbidden:
You don't have permission to access /sa-update/asf/891585.tar.gz on this
server.
Apache/2.2.3
On 17/12/2009 1:36 PM, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
OK, thanks. I'd put some contact info on top of http://daryl.dostech.ca/,
above This blog is currently in a static state pending an upgrade
of WordPress, in case something breaks next time.
I used to have that and I got about 100 messages a day
On 17/12/2009 3:31 PM, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote on Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:28:48 -0500:
early this morning.
BTW, I was already getting this temporarily when trying to run the first
sa-update for SA 3.3.0 beta1 a few days ago.
Could you tell me, off-list, the public facing
On 17/12/2009 2:21 PM, R-Elists wrote:
...based upon Togami's data processing, the biggest thing that comes to mind
is this...
*IF* these or similar rulesets are not truly not making a difference one way
or the other, then why are they there?
why do we really need them or the other
On 18/12/2009 1:11 AM, Christian Brel wrote:
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:51:35 -0500
Daryl C. W. O'Shea spamassas...@dostech.ca wrote:
I think the current score changes are a good step. Another step may
be including in the release notes that there are whitelists and that
people may want
On 18/12/2009 1:22 AM, Christian Brel wrote:
The issues here are clear:
*The inclusion of white list that pretty much favours a single
commercial mail organisation.
At present, to my knowledge Return Path is the only organization which
has approached us for inclusion in SpamAssassin. We would
On 18/12/2009 2:13 AM, Christian Brel wrote:
On he subject of Spammy whitelists...
* -1.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
low
* trust
* [212.159.7.100 listed in list.dnswl.org]
Yet the same IP is on and off SORBS and part of an ongoing spam
make the appropriate
authorities aware of the situation if you deem it appropriate to do so.
Best Regards,
Daryl C. W. O'Shea
VP Apache, Chair Apache SpamAssassin
(on behalf of the Apache SpamAssassin PMC)
...if you feel the need to reply, please reply to this email. Not the
original one in the thread. There is no need to copy responses to
bo...@apache.org and priv...@sa.
Thanks!
Daryl
On 08/12/2009 11:01 PM, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Dear List Members,
As you are all aware there has been
On 19/09/2009 3:33 PM, Warren Togami wrote:
On 09/16/2009 11:47 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
On 09/04/2009 10:51 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
OK, if you're planning to send us mass-check logs for the
3.3.0 rescoring, now's the time!
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RescoreDetails has all the
On 16/09/2009 4:03 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
Who is running a mass-check that's still in progress? (fwiw, I am ;)
I had a NAS failure over the weekend that consumed the time I was
planning on getting my systems right up-to-date for the mass-check. I
now hope to do this Thursday/Friday. I should
Hi John,
Yeah, I've had some issues with that host on and off lately. I thought
that the sa-update infra was redundant, but it looks like I forgot to
add the second MIRRORED.BY file location to DNS. Although, I seem to
recall that if you already have the MIRRORED.BY file it will continue
On 02/04/2009 10:01 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
we should probably remove that warning. it's been stable (at least in the
sense of the code not changing) for a long time now!
+1 -- I've been using M::SA::Client on my clusters (processing many
millions of messages a day) for more than 4 years
SPF_HELO_PASS is NOT considered by whitelist_from_spf.
Daryl
Here's some great news for everyone who's thinking of
traveling to Amsterdam for this year's ApacheCon Europe. The Early Bird
deadline has been extended to Friday, February 13th - and remember,
there is a discount of 150 Euro on registration for anyone staying at
the Mövenpick Hotel. Register at
On 22/12/2008 12:11 PM, Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
From: Daryl C. W. O'Shea [mailto:spamassas...@dostech.ca]
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 2:48 AM
On 19/12/2008 5:40 AM, Marcin Krol wrote:
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
do it all at once. See my SARE sa-update page for details:
http
On 23/12/2008 11:18 AM, Mike Bird wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann-2 wrote:
Daily is fine, cause it means a single DNS request only most of the
time. Updates of the stock rules however usually are less frequent than
once a week.
DNS seems to have been reporting 709395 as current for about eight
On 19/12/2008 5:40 AM, Marcin Krol wrote:
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
do it all at once. See my SARE sa-update page for details:
http://daryl.dostech.ca/sa-update/sare/sare-sa-update-howto.txt
Are SARE rules still being updated a bit at least / are they still working?
The only one really
On 18/12/2008 1:00 PM, Marcin Krol wrote:
Jeff Mincy wrote:
Try doing sa-update of the normal rules before you use sa-update of
additional rule sets.
Hmm, how do I do that? sa-update -–channel updates.spamassassin.org ?
Sure, or just run sa-update without a channel parameter or so create a
On 17/12/2008 8:26 PM, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
Sure we can do
meta META0 TEST1 TEST2
but say TEST2 is expensive, and we only want it to be run if TEST1 is
positive. I suppose SpamAssassin's whole train of thought has no ifs
ands or buts, other than a method of quitting early, but that
On 08/12/2008 7:09 PM, James Grant wrote:
Hi all, I've run into a weird situation where spamassassin will (seemingly
randomly) only do certain RBL checks.
The following are all the same spam message (1.txt), executed ~30 seconds
apart:
$ spamc -y 1.txt
C. W. O'Shea I mean... Sorry Daryl. Would that be ok
as a pet-name? ;)
Sorry, a high school science teacher of mine (Phil Stoesser... Physics
with Phil) beat you to that one a long time ago.
Daryl
On 28/11/2008 10:11 PM, George Fong wrote:
I suspect I have missed something simple but when I do sa-update --debug
it can't find spamassassin.apache.org for the updates. I am guessing
that this server only lives in Ipv4 Land?
Correct.
If this is the case, is there an IPv6 repository that
If you have only 30 seconds to read this;
Join us in celebrating the ASF's 10th Anniversary at ApacheCon!
The Call for Papers is now open for ApacheCon US 2009, taking place 2-6
November in Oakland, California. Proposals are being accepted at
http://us.apachecon.com/c/acus2009/cfp/ and can be
Original Message
Subject: [Urgent] Please help promote ApacheCon video streaming!
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 10:27:25 -0600
From: Lars Eilebrecht [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: The Apache Software Foundation
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
please help promote the ApacheCon live video
On 09/10/2008 11:57 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 08:33 -0700, William Taylor wrote:
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 11:30:11AM -0700, William Taylor wrote:
It would seem the whitelist_from_rcvd is incorrectly propigating to the
wrong users in the same thread.
For example
On 09/10/2008 12:16 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 09:02 -0700, William Taylor wrote:
On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 05:53:30PM +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
I replied with more information to Daryl's post but I must
have sent it directly to him instead of the list. I don't
On 06/10/2008 2:30 PM, William Taylor wrote:
It would seem the whitelist_from_rcvd is incorrectly propigating to the wrong
users in the same thread.
For example usera has whitelist_from_rcvd *.sonic.net sonic.net setup. If
userb gets sent mail that is
processed by that same thread it will
On 03/10/2008 5:13 PM, Rob McEwen wrote:
RE: question about testing new rulesets
Is it possible to do the following when testing out a new ruleset:
(1) score that rule at 0.01 (of course this is possible... but then
also...)
(2) copy the original source file that was fed to SA to a
Original Message
Subject: Travel Assistance to ApacheCon US 2008 - 3 days to apply!
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:10:19 +1000
From: Gav... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*- Apologies to those PMCs that already got this email. The first attempt I
made was rejected by at
On 26/09/2008 2:03 PM, McDonald, Dan wrote:
someone noticed and mentioned it on the user list. another person saw
that and filed a bug. Then one of the developers made the change,
pushed out the update, and closed the bug. I don't see that there is
any crisis here that needs to be solved.
On 26/09/2008 11:44 AM, Todd Adamson wrote:
So, it basically boils down to my lack of knowledge that dsbl died back
in June, and was used from within spamassassin. I'll admit it. I didn't
know about it. My fault.
No problem. We didn't know either. It wasn't causing any problems so
there's
On 25/09/2008 11:34 AM, Todd Adamson wrote:
Would I be correct or incorrect that this will get updated to our rules
through sa-update. If this does get corrected, what kind of time frame
are we guessing at?
Updates are currently being distributed to the mirrors. DNS will update
in a few
Thanks Jason! I've opened bug 5988.
Regards,
Daryl
On 20/09/2008 12:12 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
Are the hit frequencies from the SpamAssassin corpus available on the
web somewhere? I looked through the docs and wiki but didn't see it
if they were.
On the web, http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/
In the tarball, rules/STATISTICS*
What is the hit
On 20/09/2008 12:56 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
I have what appears to me to be a completely legitimate mail message
from a person who has the following in the mail header.
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
That is
Check to make sure that network tests aren't disabled. Many distro
packages have network tests turned off my default. Not sure where
Debian would configure this, sorry.
Daryl
On 13/09/2008 8:20 PM, aladdin wrote:
On Saturday 13 September 2008 20:00, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Check to make sure that network tests aren't disabled. Many distro
packages have network tests turned off my default. Not sure where
Debian would configure this, sorry.
Daryl
Thanks
On 07/09/2008 4:48 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
All,
I'm using spamd and I allow per-user rules. I've noticed that the user
rules are being kept although the user changes.
I'm currently using spamassassin 3.1.7, and I was just wondering if this
behaviour might already have been fixed in a later
On 06/09/2008 4:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I'm saying instead of just letting sa-update fail with the generic GNU
message and GNU hyperlink, setting the user off on a PhD Thesis effort
of trying to figure out what to do, instead just detect the problem and print
out:
On 06/09/2008 6:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I set score USER_IN_DEF_WHITELIST 0
as I guess I'm not the well rounded person reflected in the
pre-defined whitelists. Indeed not many people are I bet.
You see one day this spam got through riding high on that -15 point
boost, causing me to
On 21/08/2008 11:07 AM, Bob Gereford wrote:
i've read the description for SA's use_newest_received_spf_header @
http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.2.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Plugin_SPF.html.
i understand i can toggle the option,
Use this option to start with the newest (top most)
On 10/08/2008 4:11 PM, RN-Chris wrote:
In the two respective corpus directories (ham | spam) emails are just
dumped in there.
$WORKINGDIR/mass-check --progress --all --showdots \
ham:mbox:/var/home/c/h/chris/spamcorpus/custom/ham \
Hi Matus,
Sorry for the huge delay in responding...
On 03/07/2008 4:50 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 11.06.08 15:40, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 30.05.08 11:46, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
I'd like to use WrongMX plugin on our mailservers (I found it very good
idea and I was
On 21/06/2008 1:10 AM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
I see the following when running sa-update with debug flags:
[20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured; it is recommended
that you configure trusted_networks manually
This is expected and intentional. Your local cf files are not used
On 21/06/2008 2:05 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
On 21/06/2008 1:10 AM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
I see the following when running sa-update with debug
flags:
[20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured;
it is recommended that you configure trusted_networks
manually
This is expected
On 21/06/2008 10:45 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
Daryl C. W. O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 21/06/2008 1:10 AM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
I see the following when running sa-update with debug flags:
[20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured; it is recommended
that you configure
On 16/06/2008 10:12 AM, Helmut Schneider wrote:
Hi,
running FreeBSD I have two directories with rules in it:
/usr/local/share/spamassassin
/var/db/spamassassin/3.002005/updates_spamassassin_org
Which is the correct directory, which rules are used?
Both and both.
Rules obtained via
On 06/06/2008 4:43 PM, Aaron Bennett wrote:
Hi,
I'm in the process of converting to sa-update on rhel5, spamassassin
3.2.4, to replace a rules_du_jour installation. I'm trying to use the
dostech sa-update channels.
Ultimately I'm looking to use a channel file, but for now I'm trying to
On 24/04/2008 12:43 PM, Michael Dunne wrote:
dbg: spf: cannot get Envelope-From, cannot use SPF
Make sure that the message as passed to SA has a Return-Path header. If
there are any trusted relays (received headers) in the message passed to
SA enable the always_trust_envelope_sender option.
On 11/04/2008 3:12 PM, macosxdh wrote:
i seem to have a problem, when i run this command:
spamassassin -tD
/users/sysadmin/Desktop/Mail-SpamAssassin-3.1.9/sample-spam.txt
it just hangs there, no end in site, i let it go for about 10min, no
response.any ideas?
spamassassin is waiting
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 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 22/03/2008 11:17 AM, Chris Hoogendyk wrote:
Arthur Dent wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 06:39:01PM -0400, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
If either of you post complete debug output of sa-update (run it with
-D) and the complete output of spamassassin --lint -D, preferably
attached as text files
1 - 100 of 1074 matches
Mail list logo
