On 2011-01-01 9:45, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
Question 2
Some of the sandbox redirectors like sun.com above no longer operate.
I've commented out.
Should I just go ahead and clean out all the dead redirectors in everyone's
sandbox?
No..
One reports them and lets each sandbox owner
goes down when ppl re run sa-update
PMC/Commiters, if this is useless , pls undo.
I know what it feels like to be hammered by qjueries - not amusing.
h2h
Axb
On 2011-06-27 23:28, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
On 6/27/2011 11:22 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
Who has the access to do an emergency sa-update? Is it only Daryl?
AFAIK only Daryl knows how to do it. The last time I tried to follow
documented procedure I seriously screwed something up.
(URIBL_BLACK (URIBL_AB_SURBL ||
URIBL_JP_SURBL || URIBL_OB_SURBL || URIBL_WS_SURBL || URIBL_SC_SURBL))
etc, etc
Thanks
Axb
--
Do not use SARE rules - use sa-update
Installed SA 3.4.x from trunk snapshot
all rules rules in 72_active.cf are all missing scores which I see are
in /trunk/rulesrc/scores/72_scores.cf
Could someone pls check if they get 72_scores.cf in a trunk setup after
sa-update?
Seems to me this rule isn't being exported.
Thanks
Axb
On 2011-08-11 15:27, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 8/10/2011 9:51 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
Just FYI. Ubuntu had a package out something like the day after Warren
posted his official announcement of 3.3.2. Debian's was more recent, and
Ubuntu just synced from Debian.
I'm kind of planning
On 2011-08-12 0:12, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CustomPlugins says, twice, that the
perl modules for plugins can be kept in /etc/mail/spamassassin (aka
/etc/spamassassin, depending on your install). Just finally tried it,
and it didn't work. Perl complains
On 2011-09-13 22:23, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
We waste so much time backporting to the last branch. And trunk has been
incredibly stable. I hate to see releases that aren't taken from trunk,
seems like a waste of time and effort.
for once I agree with Darxus :)
There are a few usefull
On 2011-09-13 23:35, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 9/13/2011 4:29 PM, Axb wrote:
On 2011-09-13 22:23, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
We waste so much time backporting to the last branch. And trunk has
been
incredibly stable. I hate to see releases that aren't taken from trunk,
seems like
On 2011-09-19 23:37, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 09/19, Mark wrote:
dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
The other 38 were notifications from livejournal.com, nothing spam
related, from 2011-08-02 to 2011-08-11. It looks like you just had
livejournal.com listed as a spammer for those 10 days.
On 2011-09-20 16:20, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 09/20, Axb wrote:
from what I'm seeing:
livejournal.com is in 20_aux_tlds.cf
util_rb_2tld livejournal.com
I saw that, but didn't think it was relevant. How is it relevant? It also
doesn't seem like it makes sense. 2TLDs include things
On 2011-09-23 9:30, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
My smallish corpus (mostly ham) is Finnish language, but also English in
it. Spam is of course English and other languages, there is no Finnish
spam available ;)
There's a couple of finnish wannabe ESPs spamming purchased lists, in
finnish language
On 2011-10-10 22:28, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
The thing I found most interesting was good ADVANCE_FEE rules that aren't
mutable, with a score of 1. Why aren't these mutable? Looks like they
would do us more good if they were included in re-scoring.
* 1.0 ADVANCE_FEE_3_NEW
On 2011-10-11 19:30, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 10/10, Axb wrote:
This is a bug in trunk's sa-update score procedure and has been
reported to DOS.
The scores aren't getting added to the relevant scores file so they
get the default 1.0
Is this in bugzilla so it can be tracked
On 2011-10-14 10:17, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
IIRC, our earlier pre-releases for 3.3.0 were prior to the rescoring.
Cutting a pre-release now would at least encourage testing of the engine.
Warren, pls be patient.
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Kevin A. McGrailkmcgr...@pccc.com wrote:
On 2011-10-21 17:36, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 10/21/2011 5:44 AM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
Seehttps://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/7400/changes
This is a test failure where spamd couldn't create a socket. Is this
something in the test routine that needs to be improved
, and got the 72_scores.cf.
AXB is having some issues I'm talking about with him.
Trunk's current rules are likely numbered higher than the installed
rules is my guess. -D is the only way to tell.
AXB is seeing it try to pull update 3. Just 3.
regards,
KAM
AXB is very happy with trunk's working
:16.028 [24831] dbg: config: warning: score set for
non-existent rule TVD_PH_SUBJ_SEC_MEASURES
(probably orphans in 50_scores.cf)
Thanks
Axb
On 2011-11-05 16:46, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 11/05, Axb wrote:
Could someone using trunk pls comfirm they're also seeing this:
Nov 5 11:53:16.026 [24831] dbg: config: warning: score set for
non-existent rule TVD_PH_SUBJ_URGENT
Nov 5 11:53:16.027 [24831] dbg: config: warning: score
/50_scores.cf:score
AXB_XM_SENDMAIL_NOT 0 # n=0 n=1 n=2 n=3
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.004000/updates_spamassassin_org/50_scores.cf:score
AXB_XR_STULDAP 0 # n=0 n=1 n=2 n=3
etc, etc
Do we have a bug or is this just sa-update build delay?
Axb
?
can't find a score for thse rule so I guess this is probably a
bug/bork/historical element
Would anybody mind if I start a major cleanup in felicity's sandbox?
(seems abandoned)
Axb
On 2011-11-07 11:31, Axb wrote:
72_active.cf is leaking lots of T_ rules
most if not all seem to come from /rulesrc/sandbox(felicity/70_other.cf
considering that T_ is supposed to be testing and shouldn't be published:
1- do we need to add a nopublish to these?
or
2- do we need to remove
On 2011-11-07 15:52, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 11/7/2011 8:44 AM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Axb wrote:
Can't figure out why they they get published with a T_* in
72_active.cf when the original rules don't have them.
Would someone pls clue me in?
A manually-named T_ rule
On 2011-11-07 16:27, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
The rules updates might not trigger for a scores change and things run on UTC.
I'd give it another day.
FTR: I removed the AXB_* rules on Nov 2
Revision: 1196352
Author: axb
Date: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 0:00:56
Message:
removed orphaned
on the case - expect more of these
On 2011-11-08 15:22, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 11/8/2011 9:14 AM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
Seehttps://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/7441/changes
Alex, looks like something you did with the emailed rules breaking meta.
Likely have to put
On 2011-11-08 16:14, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
lint: config: failed to parse line, skipping, in rules/70_sandbox.cf:
uridnsblURIBL_SBL_Asbl.spamhaus.org. A at build/mkrules line
Are we're missing a test for tflags RULE net *a*
If yes Marc, would you?
Until then I've
or a feature.
Axb
ruleqa when so many
ANY_BOUNCE_MESSAGE hits start showing up.
Any idea how to avoid it without touching the sender MTA?
Axb
On 2011-11-14 17:49, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
I've noticed that my maccheck logs are full of ANY_BOUNCE_MESSAGE hits
and this is due that trap sensor MTAs empty env-sender to deliver (to
avoid possible backscatter) so the masschecker sees:
Return-Path: and thinks it's a bounce.
Wondering if
On 2011-11-14 23:33, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
completely sanitized and Return-Path:
which is what the VBOUNCE plugin is checking
Would setting masschecks prefs to
score ANY_BOUNCE_MESSAGE 0
score BOUNCE_MESSAGE, 0
be of any help?
The more I've thought about this, the more I'm worried
anybody else seeing this?
on several msgs:
Use of uninitialized value in concatenation (.) or string at
/home/axb/masscheckwork/weekly_mass_check/masses/../lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/URIDNSBL.pm
line 1001.
As the error doesn't show which msg could be causing it I have no way of
tracking
On 2011-11-21 18:14, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 11/21, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Are they being used in a meta rule that auto promotes them?
Doesn't look like it. T_DKIM_INVALID, T_DOS_ZIP_HARDCORE,
T_FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT, T_FORGED_TBIRD_IMG_SIZE, T_FRM_SILVER_GOLD,
T_FRT_ADULT2 are not
if SPF plugin is disabled --lint -D spits out
Dec 10 15:31:28.161 [19321] dbg: rules: meta test __SPF_FULL_PASS has
undefined dependency 'SPF_PASS'
Dec 10 15:31:28.161 [19321] dbg: rules: meta test __SPF_FULL_PASS has
undefined dependency 'SPF_HELO_PASS'
Dec 10 15:31:28.161 [19321] dbg: rules:
On 2011-12-12 23:26, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 12/12/2011 5:23 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Kevin A. McGrailkmcgr...@pccc.com
wrote:
* Did you really intend for Mailspike to add a total of 4.1 or 4.5
points? (Given _BL is a composite rule that adds 1.0 on top
On 2011-12-12 23:45, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 12/12/2011 5:17 PM, bugzilla-dae...@issues.apache.org wrote:
It makes it hard to create metas when rules come and go so I'd like to
propose
a basic set of old fashioned type static rules with static scores.
I thought if a rule was used in a
On 2011-12-13 18:54, bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6724
--- Comment #11 from AXBaxb.li...@gmail.com 2011-12-13 17:54:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
score URIBL_BLACK_BLOCKED 0.001
score URIBL_GREY_BLOCKED 0.001
On 2011-12-13 19:10, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
has anybody been bitten, lately by URIBL's .255 case?
Unsure. There have been people reporting that URIBL sometime in the
recent past was returning purposefully wrong answers to queries via
Google's DNS. Is that a 255 case?
I'd say yes according
On 2012-01-06 18:00, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
SpamAssassin version 3.3.0 has not had a rule update since 2012-01-05.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.1 has not had a rule update since 2012-01-05.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 has not had a rule update since 2012-01-05.
that was yesterday. Is SA
Could someone using 3.4.trunk pls verify that running:
sa-update -D --gpgkey 6C6191E3 --channel sought.rules.yerp.org
gets regular updates?
thx
Axb
On 2012-01-19 0:10, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 1/18/2012 6:03 PM, Axb wrote:
Could someone using 3.4.trunk pls verify that running:
sa-update -D --gpgkey 6C6191E3 --channel sought.rules.yerp.org
gets regular updates?
thx
Axb
Do you want it run once or by regular do you mean you want
These two rules seem to use as lot of processing time:
__FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT20.8015
__FILL_THIS_FORM_LONG20.7652
nearly a second/rule which is only used in metas seems a bit heavy.
John, could you optimize them somewhat?
Thx
On 02/27/2012 04:11 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012, Axb wrote:
These two rules seem to use as lot of processing time:
__FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT2 0.8015
__FILL_THIS_FORM_LONG2 0.7652
nearly a second/rule which is only used in metas seems a bit heavy.
John, could you optimize them
On 02/27/2012 04:24 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 2/26/2012 10:26 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
Spams: 122574 (short 27426)
Hams: 183150
Thanks for keeping an eye on this. It can stay a medium priority but we
do need to get more masscheckers into the fray. It'll improve things for
On a test box running bayes mysql I see way too many
Issuing rollback() due to DESTROY without explicit disconnect() of
DBD::mysql::db
Could someone please verify if the suggestion on
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5146192/suggestions-for-troubleshooting-this-perl-dbdmysql-error-message
On 02/28/2012 03:03 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 02/27, John Hardin wrote:
These two rules seem to use as lot of processing time:
__FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT20.8015
__FILL_THIS_FORM_LONG20.7652
Is this consistent, or do you have specific messages where it's
unusually slow? There
On 02/28/2012 04:14 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 2/28/2012 5:23 AM, Axb wrote:
On a test box running bayes mysql I see way too many
Issuing rollback() due to DESTROY without explicit disconnect() of
DBD::mysql::db
Could someone please verify if the suggestion on
http://stackoverflow.com
On 02/28/2012 03:27 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Axb wrote:
T __FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT2 5.9169 5.9169 1
T __FILL_THIS_FORM_LONG2 5.9041 5.9041 1
T RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 5.0010 5.0010 1
T __FILL_THIS_FORM_FRAUD_PHISH1 2.1362 2.1362 1
T __FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT2 6.9687 6.9687 1
T
snowshow in their ham corpus
(See http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20120310-r1299162-n/RCVD_IN_SBL/detail)
Imo, this should also be scored at 1.7 as they are both of similar
quality with DBL.
Comments?
Axb
On 03/11/2012 06:47 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 03/11, Axb wrote:
Guys,
At the moment, after last sa-update:
score RCVD_IN_XBL 0 0.724 0 0.375 # n=0 n=2
is amazingly low.
last net masscheck shows
0 43.3599 0.0133 1.000 0.970.00RCVD_IN_XBL
(http
On 03/11/2012 04:50 PM, Michael Parker wrote:
On Mar 11, 2012, at 10:21 AM, Axb wrote:
On 03/11/2012 04:02 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 03/11, Axb wrote:
There are a number of reasons for the score generator to come up with this
result.
agreed, and that doesn't mean it's 100
On 03/11/2012 06:10 PM, Henrik Krohns wrote:
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 05:09:05PM +0100, Axb wrote:
On 03/11/2012 04:50 PM, Michael Parker wrote:
On Mar 11, 2012, at 10:21 AM, Axb wrote:
On 03/11/2012 04:02 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 03/11, Axb wrote:
There are a number of reasons
-r1302798-n/MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT/detail
The few spam hits from the axb corpus don't warrant this to be kept.
Many moons ago it was a usefull spam trait, but that was way before
Microsoft started using it in their MUAs
Could we remove this rule?
Comments?
+1 for removal?
-1 for removal?
Axb
On 03/21/2012 02:31 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Axb wrote:
the MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT hits mostly ham using newish MS MUAs and seems
like pointless bloat.
Hits every other message and give a recipient a fuzzy feeling when
rcpt see this hit so often
(sic: all my messages are spam
On 03/26/2012 06:00 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
SpamAssassin version 3.3.0 has not had a rule update since 2012-02-25.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.1 has not had a rule update since 2012-02-25.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 has not had a rule update since 2012-02-25.
can we please loose these
On 03/27/2012 11:36 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Den 2012-03-26 18:26, Jan Hejl skrev:
Hello everyone,
last few months i've been working on new BayesStore module. This
module uses all-in-memory DB called Redis - more at redis.io
so why not use mysql memory engine ?
will your plugin store data
On 03/27/2012 11:56 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Den 2012-03-27 11:43, Axb skrev:
SIMPLE:
- mysql doesn't scale under high traffic.
so what does ?
probably anything which doesn't try to be ACID compliant
On 06/01/2012 03:54 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 05/31, John Hardin wrote:
We appear to have just crossed the threshold, maybe we'll get a
rules update this weekend...
http://www.chaosreigns.com/dnswl/tot.svg
woohoo!
Wow, cool.
Looks like that's largely axb-generic, went
On 06/01/2012 01:50 PM, Matthias Leisi wrote:
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Kevin A. McGrailkmcgr...@pccc.com wrote:
They are biased but we'll build on it and get more masscheckers!
I can provide a mostly spamtrap-driven corpus. It's size is basically
endless, I'm just throwing most of
On 06/01/2012 04:28 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Den 2012-06-01 03:54, dar...@chaosreigns.com skrev:
http://www.chaosreigns.com/dnswl/tot.svg
from 2007 ?
Looks like that's largely axb-generic, went from 41,619 to 103,398 spams
for the last two weekly / net masschecks. The second largest spam
Yet another (yuk!) Facebook game.
If they send mail with that domain, it's not happening as a generic user
freemailer. If they play bad, they'll feel it elsewhere.
Axb
On 06/08/2012 03:07 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
I saw this and was responding:
Skim.com appears to redir now to facebook
: subject_is_all_caps - strip prefixes like Re:, Fwd:
Sending lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/HeaderEval.pm
Committed revision 1354506.
while you're at it:
WG: (german Weiterleitung / Forward)
TR: french?
Axb
list
Votes to see it go away? (even scoring low is asking for trouble)
Axb
On 07/03/2012 04:14 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 3 Jul 2012, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 7/3/2012 10:00 AM, Axb wrote:
score FROM_12LTRDOM 3.5
Even with lots of conditions, a 12 letter domain is nothing
extraordinary,
especially in the eurozone.
Imo, this rule should be applied
via 73_sandbox_manual_scores.cf and
not in sanbox files
They have comment:
# observed in UCE 9/2009
As they are hitting lots of ham, can we please loose these.
HDRS_LCASE_IMGONLY may be another candidate to be dropped.
Thanks
Axb.
Good day Commiters,
Could we agree to remove/disable no hits at all rules?
This would speed up masschecks quite a bit.
(also, never hurts to do a cleanup)
Thanks
Axb
On 07/04/2012 04:40 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jul 2012, Axb wrote:
from last update's 72_scores.cf
score HDRS_LCASE3.749 3.999 3.749 3.999
score MANY_HDRS_LCASE 1.251 1.004 1.251 1.004
Although John manually set low scores
where corpora are not being included?
I'm watching my masscheck logs closely - all there.
Axb
On 08/08/2012 12:46 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
08.08.2012 11:19, Kevin Golding kirjoitti:
So I got asked if I could run a masscheck for ruleqa this morning, which
puzzled me because I thought I had been...
Sure enough, checking the ruleqa site shows no recent uploads from me, which
was
On 08/08/2012 01:41 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
08.08.2012 13:48, Axb kirjoitti:
On 08/08/2012 12:46 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
08.08.2012 11:19, Kevin Golding kirjoitti:
So I got asked if I could run a masscheck for ruleqa this morning,
which puzzled me because I thought I had been...
Sure
On 08/08/2012 11:51 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
09.08.2012 00:45, Kevin A. McGrail kirjoitti:
On 8/8/2012 5:38 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
# mass-check results from jarif@whirlwind, on ke 8.8.2012 13.55.30
+ # M:SA version 3.4.0-r1197259 # SVN revision: 1370707 # Date:
20120808T135530Z #
running it manually, and see if it's crashing or
complaining? Console output shows quite clearly when't there a hiccup
Axb
On 08/14/2012 06:00 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
SpamAssassin version 3.3.0 has not had a rule update since 2012-08-13.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.1 has not had a rule update since 2012-08-13.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 has not had a rule update since 2012-08-13.
20120813: Spam: 748887,
On 08/14/2012 06:50 PM, Daniel McDonald wrote:
Each night when I run masschecks, I get a lot of (couple of hundred) errors
that look like:
Use of uninitialized value in regexp compilation at
/home/dmcdonald/nightlymc/trunk/masses/../blib/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Archive
Iterator.pm line 437, INPUT
On 09/03/2012 07:00 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
SpamAssassin version 3.3.0 has not had a rule update since 2012-08-23.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.1 has not had a rule update since 2012-08-23.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 has not had a rule update since 2012-08-23.
20120902: Spam: 220137,
On 09/06/2012 10:32 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2012, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 09/06, John Hardin wrote:
Is there a quick way to get a list of the update rev #s? DNS only
lists the most recent...
Only way I know of is the logs I've been keeping from DNS. Only showing
3.3.2
to push
out?
Thanks
Axb.
On 09/14/2012 11:10 AM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
See https://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/8006/changes
Unhappy spamd?
https://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/8006/testReport/
On 09/14/2012 03:47 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 9/14/2012 5:30 AM, Axb wrote:
On 09/14/2012 11:10 AM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
See https://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/8006/changes
Unhappy spamd?
https://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/8006/testReport/
Never
On 09/27/2012 01:51 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 9/26/2012 6:43 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
I recently got a false positive largely due to this rule:
* 3.0 SUBJ_YOUR_DEBT Subject contains Your Bills or similar
I think it's interesting that a rule can get scored so high when
On 09/27/2012 04:27 PM, bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6844
AXB axb.li...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
totally new to me...
gcc -g -O2 spamc/spamc.c spamc/getopt.c spamc/libspamc.c spamc/utils.c \
-o spamc/spamc -ldl -lz
spamc/libspamc.c:68:18: fatal error: zlib.h: No such file or directory
compilation terminated.
make[1]: *** [spamc/spamc] Error 1
axb
On 10/02/2012 01:51 PM, Henrik Krohns wrote:
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 01:38:40PM +0200, Axb wrote:
totally new to me...
gcc -g -O2 spamc/spamc.c spamc/getopt.c spamc/libspamc.c spamc/utils.c \
-o spamc/spamc -ldl -lz
spamc/libspamc.c:68:18: fatal error: zlib.h
On 10/02/2012 02:11 PM, Axb wrote:
On 10/02/2012 01:51 PM, Henrik Krohns wrote:
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 01:38:40PM +0200, Axb wrote:
totally new to me...
gcc -g -O2 spamc/spamc.c spamc/getopt.c spamc/libspamc.c
spamc/utils.c \
-o spamc/spamc -ldl -lz
spamc
On 10/02/2012 06:34 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 10/02, Axb wrote:
On 10/02/2012 02:11 PM, Axb wrote:
On 10/02/2012 01:51 PM, Henrik Krohns wrote:
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 01:38:40PM +0200, Axb wrote:
totally new to me...
gcc -g -O2 spamc/spamc.c spamc/getopt.c spamc
On 10/04/2012 04:15 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Committers,
Please make sure to run svn upgrade and make test on your local checkout
before committing, even rules.
More rules running afoul of this...
svn commit -m 'More regression test fails. Moved __FROM_FREEMAIL to
10_has_base.cf as well'
On 10/04/2012 05:01 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 10/4/2012 10:27 AM, Axb wrote:
There were not freemail rule changes, they were changes I made in
maddoc's sandbox (with his permission) - the rules where named with
FREEMAIL
Roger that. They are rules dealing with Freemail is all I'm saying
On 10/04/2012 05:16 PM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
See https://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/8071/changes
More regression test fails. Moved __FROM_FREEMAIL to 10_has_base.cf as well
AARG!
John,
please fix your rules to use the (mantained) FREEMAIL plugin rules and
not use
On 10/04/2012 06:03 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2012, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 10/4/2012 11:23 AM, Axb wrote:
On 10/04/2012 05:16 PM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
See https://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/8071/changes
More regression test fails. Moved
of cycles scanning a two liner with an attached
400kb PDF/workd/etc attachement.
or did it get it all wrong?
Axb
On 10/23/2012 10:15 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 10/23/2012 4:10 PM,
Axb wrote:
On 10/23/2012 09:59 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 10/23/2012 3:48 PM, bugzilla-dae...@issues.apache.org wrote:
A message larger than a certain configured size is truncated
at the configured size
On 10/23/2012 11:29 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, Axb wrote:
On 10/23/2012 10:48 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
My thoughts were to ignore any binary attachments.
I don't think that's justified. I'm beginning to see a resurgence
On 10/24/2012 02:34 AM, Mark Martinec wrote:
On Tuesday October 23 2012 22:26:00 Axb wrote:
Spamc/Spamd's skip size method has made a huge *positive* difference
on FPs, and scan times.
The FNs wouldn't *ever* have been caught by a chunk method due to the
kind of content included above
, and the servers in received headers are our
company servers, so I do not publish this to everyone.
Any volunteers?
beam it over (as eml in an archive, please)
Axb
On 11/06/2012 10:59 AM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
06.11.2012 11:47, Jari Fredriksson kirjoitti:
X-Spam-Report:
* -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at
http://www.dnswl.org/, low
* trust
* [208.99.185.53 listed in list.dnswl.org]
* -0.0
On 11/06/2012 11:29 AM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
06.11.2012 12:14, Axb kirjoitti:
On 11/06/2012 10:59 AM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
06.11.2012 11:47, Jari Fredriksson kirjoitti:
X-Spam-Report:
* -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at
http://www.dnswl.org/, low
On 11/09/2012 05:58 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
I think these should be added to the rules:
reuse BAYES_00
reuse BAYES_05
reuse BAYES_20
reuse BAYES_40
reuse BAYES_50
reuse BAYES_60
reuse BAYES_80
reuse BAYES_95
reuse BAYES_99
Recently playing around a little with bayes stuff, I noticed
On 11/09/2012 06:48 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
I haven't done as much testing on this as I'd like, but I've gotten away
from it, and wanted to get my thoughts in here before I forget them.
I have a strong suspicion that SA's bayes implementation sucks.
The two major problems, as I see
On 11/09/2012 09:11 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 11/9/2012 2:50 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 11/09, Axb wrote:
On 11/09/2012 05:58 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
I think these should be added to the rules:
reuse BAYES_00
reuse BAYES_05
reuse BAYES_20
reuse BAYES_40
reuse
On 11/09/2012 09:21 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 11/09, Axb wrote:
I realize some of the corpora won't have the bayes data, including most of
mine. But I don't see how that's a reason not to provide the data that has
already been calculated to ruleqa.
coz chances are it's skewed data
On 12/10/2012 03:42 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 12/10/2012 2:00 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
SpamAssassin version 3.3.0 has not had a rule update since 2012-12-08.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.1 has not had a rule update since 2012-12-08.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 has not had a rule update
1 - 100 of 231 matches
Mail list logo
