On Thursday 13 January 2005 03:44 pm, Thomas Arend wrote:
Because SuSE stores spamd in /usr/sbin/spamd and the tarball stores it
in /usr/bin/spamd the SA does not run.
You could have put a symlink in /usr/bin
ln -s /usr/sbin/spamd /usr/bin/spamd
--
Top ten reasons to procrastinate.
1.
Phil Barnett wrote:
On Thursday 13 January 2005 03:44 pm, Thomas Arend wrote:
Because SuSE stores spamd in /usr/sbin/spamd and the tarball stores
it in /usr/bin/spamd the SA does not run.
You could have put a symlink in /usr/bin
ln -s /usr/sbin/spamd /usr/bin/spamd
I'm feeling puckish
On Thursday 13 January 2005 07:19 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Phil Barnett wrote:
I'm feeling puckish today so I'll say it.
Or even symlink /usr/sbin to /usr/bin (shock, horror) :-)
Gasp, You've gone too far, now... ;-)
--
Top ten reasons to procrastinate.
1.
I have searched around rulesemporium without much success trying to find
these LOCAL_OBFU_* rules. I don't suppose you could tell me the
filename that they occur in could you? (I assume they will be in
/etc/mail/Spamassassin or wherever your local.cf file is for your
install).
Sorry, for
Another possible solution would be to have the list server
add SA:
to the beginning of each subject line (when not already there).
Any thoughts? Suggestions?
Also, this got hashed out on this list about 6 months ago. You can read
the
gory details in the archives.
In short,
Of course, that's not universally true, Keith. Someone is flooding the
Internet with email messages so bogus fetchmail spits up on it. I had to
telnet into the Earthlink server and manually delete the message.
8
list
+OK
1 475
.
retr 1
+OK 475 octets
Status: U
Return-Path: [EMAIL
In spite of a batch of really badly malformed mails from telepac.pt
I note that my spam volume for the last 22 hours is little more than
half normal. What happened? Can we make it happen more often?
{O.O} Joanne, properly astonished.
Joanne
slightly up on pre-Christmas levels for me. Was running around 2,000 per
work day now back to 2,500 yesterday which is just over the Pre Jan
levels of around 2,400 per day.
I also note a large increase in phishing emails and the malware traffic
is back up to normal after an extended
In spite of a batch of really badly malformed mails from telepac.pt
I note that my spam volume for the last 22 hours is little more than
half normal. What happened? Can we make it happen more often?
{O.O} Joanne, properly astonished.
Spam is about normal here, but the number of viruses
Menno van Bennekom wrote:
Spam is about normal here, but the number of viruses catched is one tenth
of the normal amount the last days. I double-checked amavisd/clamav but
everything is working normal, it must be the silence before the storm..
I've seen a slight decrease in spam (down about 10%)
would it help if build new dbs?
and use those to check if the debug will see the toks?
would that affect the sa learning process somehow?
sa-learn --dbpath /var/spamdb/bayes --dump magic
i get this:
0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db version
0.000 0
Thomas,
That was a mail that made it through. I won't go through my entire
process, but I archive every mail that comes in to our system, and when
I'm done, I have every e-mail that made it through to the user's desk.
I have specific rules set up and was wondering why mail that I knew
should
Hello!
Grab the latest SVN image from the downloads page and look at
EMPTY_MESSAGE.
Thanks, but ...
I can't open http://cvs.apache.org/snapshots/spamassassin .
Is there an other location aivable?
Best Regards,
Ingo
- Original Message -
From: Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Ingo
Keith,
Why would you need to be psychic?
1. My e-mail shows the NAME of my rule - MY_CAPABLE
2. My e-mail shows the MY_CAPABLE rule worked, adding 11 points to the
score
3. My e-mail shows my threshold is 4 points, and the e-mail scored
14.
4. I stated this was from an e-mail that made it
Well, it obviously was scored correctly, and showed at least some headers
indicating this. So SA must be doing its job.
Since SA isn't in charge of deciding what to DO with the mail once it is
scored, the problem must lie in some other part of your system.
The only possibiliity I can think of
Thank you. I thought I remembered earlier posts where people listed
problems like some e-mail were not being checked or every other
e-mail was being skipped, and I was wondering if I might be
experiencing some of that.
Loren Wilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/14 7:04 AM
Well, it obviously was scored
Hi!
Ok, the ideea is great but dont' work for me.
# __MIME_ATTACHMENT defined in 20_html_tests.cf
body __NONEMPTY_BODY/\S/
meta EMPTY_MESSAGE !__MIME_ATTACHMENT !__NONEMPTY_BODY
describe EMPTY_MESSAGE Message appears to be empty with no Subject: text
score EMPTY_MESSAGE 2
Any hint's?
Keith Below are headers from spam I received. Why is the envelope recipient
Keith not in the received header??? i changed the To: user's email to xx
Keith for privacy, but this mail also arrived into a mailbox which was not
Keith the mailbox in the To: header.
Keith Received: from
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Freitag, 14. Januar 2005 13:04 schrieb Loren Wilton:
Well, it obviously was scored correctly, and showed at least some headers
indicating this. So SA must be doing its job.
Since SA isn't in charge of deciding what to DO with the mail once it
Please note that if you upgraded from 3.0.0 to 3.0.1 or 3.0.2,
the uridnsbl rules changed from type header to type body.
If the rules are not similarly updated, they will not trigger.
Jeff C.
--
Jeff Chan
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.surbl.org/
Joe Zitnik wrote:
Keith,
Why would you need to be psychic?
Sorry, my way of saying that I didn't think you gave us enough
information with your request for help.
Did you post the mail that you passed through spam assassin manually, or
the one that made it through?
Did you try passing the
Hi Chris,
Chris Thielen wrote:
John Fleming wrote:
Bayes in the current version will not autolearn against itself (will
not auto-learn as ham something it thought was spam, or v.v.) -- it
might be a good enhancement to also have bayes look at AWL if active,
and if AWL disagrees with the auto-learn
Hello,
I have two mailservers one running amavis + spamassasin 2.x and the other
running spamassasin 3 as a filter from maildrop. The maildrop+ spamassim 3.x
let more spam get through then spamassasin 3.x, i believe it is some
configuration but I always used spamassasin in default options. So
John Beck wrote:
* u: the SMTP envelope recipient(s), but (and this is the key to your
question) if there is more than one recipient, this macro is unset to
protect the privacy of all recipients (e.g., so if the sender blind
copied anyone, that the others would not be able to determine
Keith Would you also have any insight on my other question, which is Can
Keith I access the Envelope Recipients in SA, called from Mimedefang?
Sorry, I have only limited experience with milter (assuming you're even
using that), and almost none with mimedefang. Good luck!
-- John
__MIME_ATTACHMENT, I believe, requires a new feature not in 3.0.2 so you
won't be able to simply drop in this rule. The problem is that without
that rule, you'll match messages with an attachment but no other body text.
One option is to combine the empty message rule with a no To rule which
Hi,
in 70_sare_header0.cf rule SARE_RECV_SPAM_DOMN0a, mediaways.net
is listed as an apparent spammer domain.
Telefonica Germany uses mediaways.net for their dial-ups
(they are the a large ISP in Germany, specialized in
business customers and carrier services).
Regards,
Christoph
--
Spare Space
Keith,
I think you may have seen too many Oliver Stone movies, or perhaps
gotten too wrapped up in the X-Files. Are you somehow involved in the
paranormal? All this talk of secretiveness and psychics might be better
suited to the alt.psycho.babble newsgroup. The entire process that I
was
Thomas,
We use a program called Guinevere, that works with Novell GroupWise
systems to filer the e-mail after it has passed through SA. All of the
suggestions I have received seem to point to the fact that this may be
where the error lies. I appreciate all the suggestions by the group.
Thomas
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:36:25 -0800, Bart Schaefer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Menno van Bennekom wrote:
Sorry, that was mis-attibuted. I meant to trim that line.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Freitag, 14. Januar 2005 18:52 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hello,
I have two mailservers one running amavis + spamassasin 2.x and the other
running spamassasin 3 as a filter from maildrop. The maildrop+ spamassim
3.x let more spam get through
From: John Wilcock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Menno van Bennekom wrote:
Spam is about normal here, but the number of viruses catched is one
tenth
of the normal amount the last days. I double-checked amavisd/clamav but
everything is working normal, it must be the silence before the storm..
I've
From: Joe Zitnik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Keith,
Why would you need to be psychic?
1. My e-mail shows the NAME of my rule - MY_CAPABLE
2. My e-mail shows the MY_CAPABLE rule worked, adding 11 points to the
score
3. My e-mail shows my threshold is 4 points, and the e-mail scored
14.
4. I
Chris Santerre wrote:
Brief header I'm not too interested in.
HTML code showing verizon site. Should we block all mysite pages? /sniker/
a onmouseover=window.status='See Your Savings!';return true;
href=http://mysite.verizon.net/resoxfmz/1.htm;img border=0
Thank you JD, that is the direction most everyone has been pointing me
in.
jdow [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/14/05 3:50 PM
From: Joe Zitnik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Keith,
Why would you need to be psychic?
1. My e-mail shows the NAME of my rule - MY_CAPABLE
2. My e-mail shows the MY_CAPABLE rule
I do wonder if spam fell off at about 12.30 GMT - about the time BT
binned a few adsl's in error... of course
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4175805.stm
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:47:34 -0800, jdow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: John Wilcock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Menno van Bennekom wrote:
36 matches
Mail list logo
