On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry I don't know the product version as I didn't install this, but it's
one of the more recent releases.
The headers will tell you:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-crf_2.60_20040105_00
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004, snowchyld wrote:
how does one go about setting up an SMTPReject wrt SA ?
are there docs for sendmail/exim/qmail etc ?
i would love to 5xx say spam above certain threshold with a rude message ^_^
For Sendmail, take a look at spamass-milter. Unfortunately, you
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004, Martin Radford wrote:
At Sat Jan 17 13:53:50 2004, Carl R. Friend wrote:
The version in my case is 2.60 with a custom ruleset of my own
called 20040105_00. 2.60 handles this image-spam. Here's the
header generated from a test of your message and some dummy
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Luca Spiller wrote:
Today I recieved an email from my ISP - the subject was Special
Announcement: A Thank You Gift From Freeserve! so as you can guess Spam
Assassin thought it was spam (I could not be bothered to whitelist it
before now so thatÂ’s why). Spam Assassin
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
okay, so i did... i see no reason to use these rules, unless this
becomes a common tactic.
OVERALL SPAM HAM S/O SCORE NAME
10970 6083 48870.555 0.000.00 (all messages)
2201.000
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Carl Chipman wrote:
What do most people who write new SA rules set their threshold too? I had
set it around 3.0 for our company, but the false positive rate was very
high. I was looking at some of the big-evil stuff and noticed that many of
the scores were 3.0 by
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Andrew Cranson wrote:
What per-user preferences are supported by the mysql integration? Just the
basics like required_hits and white/blacklisting, or is it possible to
support more? Thanks.
The per-user configurability capabilities of the MySQL interface
go well
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Andrew Cranson wrote:
See
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg03016.html
* http://nyx.ilk.com/qsspam/
There is a mention of a delete_mail_threshold. I have been trying to
implement that via mySQL but it doesn't appear to be doing anything. Is
there a
Greetings fellow spam assassins!
I'd like to take a moment of your time and gripe about a certain
rule that seems to be causing some grief to the users at the Ocean
State FreeNet (osfn.org) -- FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS.
Our system runs on a package known as FreePort, and that package
dictates
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Russell H. wrote:
I'm running the latest release (2.61) on FreeBSD with the standard
sendmail+procmail config using spamc/spamd and it seems that user_prefs
are not working. I've tried setting up whitelists/blacklists and played
with the threshold value but it only
On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Wendel, Jesse wrote:
Okay - well, I followed your suggestion and gave it a shot.
Below is the entire /etc/rc.d/init.d/spamassassin file as
modified - SPAMDOPTIONS=-d -c -a -m5 -H -i 0.0.0.0 -
after which I restarted the service.
It still isn't working.
Try
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
A Spam got through SA last night, with two things I hadn't seen before - Yet
another form of a %RANDOM variable that isn't replaced by a value:
Subject: Re: %RND_UC_CHAR[2-8], he inadvertently turned
That's a ratware misfire. The
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Justin Mason wrote:
http://osdir.com/Article198.phtml
Editor's Choice for Best Application (Top 5 environments):
Email: SpamAssassin (Double Winner)
Well done, gentlemen! {hoists glass}
On 14 Dec 2003, Rubin Bennett wrote:
The spammers are getting smarter about Bayes... this one sneaked through
SA 2.6, a well trained Bayes database, and the BigEvil rules with a
score of 1.0 out of 5.
The body of the spam in question was more than 80% Bayes-
poison. It's not surprising
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Raquel Rice wrote:
I've tried several times to run spamc from a site-wide procmailrc.
It just hangs. This is what I have in the /etc/procmailrc:
:0fw
* 256000
| spamc
and I've made certain to have started spamd.
You don't say how you
On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Richard Bewley wrote:
Hmm, it looks as though this would be the problem:
debug: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? no
debug: is DNS available? 0
Yup. If you're trying to run a DNS-based RBL, that'll
stop you in your tracks.
Now, the next question, how do I go
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Justin Mason wrote:
A good test to catch this would be the use of too many TD tags;
it's pretty simple to spot that way. I don't think we have one
yet, though, since this is still a very rare pattern.
I've got an experimental abstracted simple word counter
as an
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Damien Kemens - Friendly Computers wrote:
I'm having some troubles configuring local.cf to check to a custom rbl. It
worked for a time, but then something. nothing that I'm aware of, changed.
And now it is not working. The rbl is still in the same location, and the
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, jenni baier wrote:
For example, I get a few Stock Pick spams that reference legitimate
quote sites... they don't necessarily want you to respond directly to
them, they just want you to buy their stock.
The answer, in this case, is to isolate the portion of the
URI
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Jennifer Wheeler wrote:
Idan Lerer said:
I would like to block spammer that sends me emails with mail from
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip
header LOCAL_SAPM_FROM_WALLA ALL =~ /\abcd.\w{0,[EMAIL PROTECTED]/i
Idan,
quote the dot \.:
header
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Scott Harris wrote:
Ahh, the great editor debate :-)
Why are we hiding from the police, daddy?
Because we use vi, son, and they use emacs.
Disclaimer: The above is not my creation. I pilfered it from
somewhere. I forget where. I wasn't even there. You can
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Obantec Support wrote:
RH8.0 with SA2.60 installed as sitewide.
Procmailrc is handling spam for all users and creates
~/.spamassassin/user_prefs ok.
Now 1 customer has decided he does not like spam filtered emails (cannot
please all).
tried |/usr/bin/spamassasin
On 27 Nov 2003, John Horne wrote:
The mailhub is a Sun Solaris 9 ultra 10 with perl 5.8.0. Generally no
problems with the new version except that I just cannot seem to get the
usual SA logging to occur which states how long it took to spam check
the message, etc. I have set the syslog.conf
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Jeremy Dold wrote:
Does someone want to respond to this guy and point out the obvious?
http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/11/14/45FEspam_1.html?s=tc
I haven't been able to properly ascertain the author's various
connections to commercial ventures, but in this
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003, Richard Bewley wrote:
I want to add BNBL (bl.blueshore.net) to my DNSBL checks in SpamAssassin,
can I just add something like this to 20_dnsbl_tests.cf
header RCVD_IN_BNBLeval:check_rbl('bnbl', 'bl.blueshore.net.')
describe RCVD_IN_BNBL Received
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Justin Mason wrote:
BTW, given that a URI DB cannot use regular expressions, or patterns,
would this really be useful?
It would have the limited use of IDing specific domains that
get repeatedly spamvertised to the point where we (1) notice
them and (2) the spams
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, William Stearns wrote:
As a general rule, I'm testing against domains; it's too easy for
spammers use random hostnames more often than they do already. If I try,
won't I just end up with:
uri WLS_URI_1 /^http:.*\b0-go.org\b/i
which puts us
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, David B Funk wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Carl R. Friend wrote:
For the assembled group -- is it possible to do a DB lookup,
either in an eval() or some other mechanism, in a uri rule?
If we could do a DB lookup on URIs (or, more properly, the
domain portion
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Rick [Kitty5] wrote:
Is it possible to put the spam score in the subject?
Yes. A quick read of the FM ((friendly|fine) manual) shows:
subject_tag STRING ...(default: *SPAM*)
Text added to the Subject: line of mails that are
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Charles Gregory wrote:
I got a spam today that just missed being spam by a few fractions of a
point. The Click here URL was:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/031112/lnw017_1.html
We've gotten several hundred of those at ny PPOE in the
past few days. It's a standard
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, William Stearns wrote:
Good day, all,
G'day.
My first attempt to do URI rules is at
http://www.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/sa-blacklist.2003111402.uri.cf
My, that's a big list. And a whole lot of regexes
Would someone be willing to just take a quick
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Lukreme wrote:
uri YAHOO_REDIR /srd.yahoo.com\/drst\/.*\*http:/
Quick (stupid) question. What is the best place to add rules where
they will not get blown away via an upgrade?
Give a go at putting it in /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf --
that's where I put
Greetings Assassins!
I've got a silly question that can be answered with a simple Yes
or No (or a go sod off you stupid git, although I hope it won't
come to _that_).
Is it possible for an eval() test to return a value to be used as
the ultimate score for a given test? To wit, I want
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Chris Santerre wrote:
http://www.angelfire.com/space/netcensus/ispassassin.html
Its crap like this article that keep ISPs from even telling users
they have the ability to use SA!!! I've seen major ISPs never tell
there customers unless they ask for some antispam
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Ihsan Dogan wrote:
I'm using Spamassassin 2.55 with spamd/spamc. I started spamd
with this options: -u nobody --user-config -c
The users on this system, starting spamc from their .procmailrc.
My problem is, that something is changing the permissions of
John writes:
I have been running spamassassin 2.55 for some time (am about to go to
2.60).
Do. 2.60 fixes quite a few things, shuts down now-long-gone
RBLs, improves scoring, and (even though I was originally a
skeptic) performs well enough (sans Bayes).
Everything has been working
Adam Denenberg asks:
Does anybody have any comments or feedback on using SA with perl 5.8
on solaris 9 running 64 bit? Or maybe 2.8 running perl 64 bit?
I've got SA (2.60) running on a Sun Ultra-1, in 64-bit mode on
Solaris 2.8, and don't see any problems. The Perl version I'm using
Forrest Aldrich asks:
This new virus appears to generate many (random?) subjects, so it's getting
difficult to narrow down.
Has anyone filters for Spamassassin that will correctly identify this
virus? I'd like to score this one high so they are rejected (via
spamass-milter)... it's
Hello,
I added a section to the main page of the wiki www.exito.us :)
One can't repeat this enough, it is NOT a good idea to automatically delete
emails marked spam. Then again, it isn't a good idea to date your cousin,
but some people never learn!
OK, I'll have to admit I darn near
Gentlemen (and ladies),
Chris Santerre writes:
I'm just curious as to something that was hinted on before. Will future SA
versions allow users to write other evaltest files like .cf files now?
Yeah, it's definitely on the cards -- we have to do something like this.
Oh, *please*
Theewara asks:
I use spamassassin with sendmail. Can spamassassin log host that =
send spam mail in simple format? For example:
Aug 10 18:20:05 abc spamd[29713]: identified spam (7.1/5.0) from =
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes. If you're using spamd you can specify syslog() style
logging
Greetings.
I'm new to this list, but not to SpamAssassin, and have a query
regarding some of the newer types of spam I'm beginning to see at a
small ISP I donate time to.
Specifically, I'm talking about the kind of spam that shows up as
an HTML link to a HREFed image and *very* little
Michael Clark writes:
Would a rule that adds points for no pingable web site for a domain
be useful? If spam comes in from [EMAIL PROTECTED], could
http://www.example.com be tested? If you get a 404 or no response,
give the message a couple points. Just an idea, Mike
Probably not
Doug Roberts pleads:
We just set up shop at a co-lo, started firing off mails to customers that
requested to download our product (a spamassassin-based filter, ironically)
and discovered that we are the proud owners of part of a class C that has
been blocked because the previous owners
Joshua Graham asks:
Mail from one of my domains (suckycentral.com) keeps getting marked as
spam due to the fact that SA insists it contains words of an adult nature.
Even if it's a blank message.
Is there anyway I can remove the word suck from adult list so my mail
won't keep getting
45 matches
Mail list logo
