DBM is fine for small installations but if you need to scale up then SQL
will allow for a consolidate database across multiple machine.
We use it on a decent size platform (multiple front end relays, multiple
sa boxes and a clustered MySQL instance). It works well for us.
For bayes training, we
I use SpamAssassin on Windows with no Perl/CYGWIN environment (via MDaemon)
which means I can't use RDJ, so I found and customised a reasonably advanced
batch file which automatically checks for newer versions of the SA rules I
want, and downloads them if there are new versions available for
I am guessing that our PostFix rejected the message based on
SpamAssassin's analysis.
Quite possibly true. However, since there is no stock rule for Goldmine
that I'm aware of, this would indicate you have a custom local rule
objecting to the X-Mailer line. Adjusting it as you desire should be
Hi All,
A specific message is hitting the following rule:
* 5 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL listed in the SBL blocklist
* [URIs: annealbatross.org]
The sender would like to know how to fix it and i
am unable to find any reference anywhere on the
procedure stating how to go
Webmaster wrote:
Those of you you have used both native DBM and new SQL bayesian,
can you comment on benefits of one versus the other please.
Much appreciated!
I have three MX servers fronting our Exchange box. The fastest of the
MX servers is also handling the MySQL server for both
http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/173910/e7bf95a7cb044637/
They are wondering why bayes_99 is not given 5 points by default, as it
seems to have no FP.
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc --- it-management Michael Monnerie
// http://zmi.at Tel: 0660/4156531 Linux 2.6.11
Cami wrote:
Hi All,
A specific message is hitting the following rule:
* 5 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL listed in the SBL blocklist
* [URIs: annealbatross.org]
The sender would like to know how to fix it and i
am unable to find any reference anywhere on the
procedure
Hi All,
A specific message is hitting the following rule:
* 5 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL listed in the SBL blocklist
* [URIs: annealbatross.org]
The sender would like to know how to fix it and i
am unable to find any reference anywhere on the
procedure stating how to go
Webmaster wrote:
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jeff Portwine wrote:
Hmm.. I don't quite understand this.At my company, we forward
any spam that gets through to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and any ham marked
as spam to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... this was set up long ago before
Seems to produce != doesn't ever.
Depends on your config, but I think the developers err on the side of
caution a little and don't have single test score that would trigger go over
the default 'is spam' limit.
Could be wrong - frequently am...
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Michael Monnerie wrote:
http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/173910/e7bf95a7cb044637/
They are wondering why bayes_99 is not given 5 points by default, as it
seems to have no FP.
Statisticaly speaking, 1% of BAYES_99 hits should be nonspam.In reality,
it does a lot better than that.
However, in
Dojja wrote:
Cami wrote:
A specific message is hitting the following rule:
* 5 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL listed in the SBL blocklist
* [URIs: annealbatross.org]
The sender would like to know how to fix it and i
am unable to find any reference anywhere on the
procedure
Title: RE: URIBL_SBL
-Original Message-
From: Cami [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 9:45 AM
To: Spamassasin Users List
Subject: Re: URIBL_SBL
Dojja wrote:
Cami wrote:
A specific message is hitting the following rule:
* 5 URIBL_SBL
Title: RE: Automatically Updating Rules on Windows
All three of you should add them to the www.exit0.us wiki!!
And also, bring me a shrubery!
--Chris
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 4:25 AM
To:
Jeremy a écrit :
I use SpamAssassin on Windows with no Perl/CYGWIN environment
do you mean you managed to run SA without perl? if so, how?
Matt Kettler writes:
Michael Monnerie wrote:
http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/173910/e7bf95a7cb044637/
They are wondering why bayes_99 is not given 5 points by default, as it
seems to have no FP.
Statisticaly speaking, 1% of BAYES_99 hits should be nonspam.In reality,
it does a lot
Cami wrote:
Dojja wrote:
Cami wrote:
A specific message is hitting the following rule:
* 5 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL listed in the SBL blocklist
* [URIs: annealbatross.org]
This is not clear at all, i can not see what list it is on
because it does not mention what
Title: RE: SpamAssassin tested by lwn.net
Michael Monnerie wrote:
http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/173910/e7bf95a7cb044637/
They are wondering why bayes_99 is not given 5 points by
default, as it
seems to have no FP.
Disregarding the excellent explanation JMason gave, there
I am having some trouble finding the spamassassin config files on my system.
I have got /etc/mail/spamassassin with local.cf and init.pre, I have
/etc/spamassassin with the same two files but all four of them seem
relatively empty with only 4 config lines, all of them commented.
I do have a
Sorry, should have mentioned that /etc/mail/spamassassin is a link to
/etc/spamassassin not a directory.
--
Jay
James Smith wrote:
Sorry, should have mentioned that /etc/mail/spamassassin is a link to
/etc/spamassassin not a directory.
Run 'spamassassin -D --lint' and look for a line like the following:
[18246] dbg: config: read file /etc/mail/spamassassin/init.pre
--
Bowie
Hi folks,
I'm having some trouble getting the bayes filter
to work on my windows installation. SA 3.1.0 is
installed and working properly, the ESA fires on
every received message and calls spamassassin.bat.
Bayes DB trained with 260 HAMs and 2600 SPAMs ^^.
When I strip a spam message of its
Webmaster wrote:
Also if your users are only or mostly forwarding spam, SA's
bayes is going to have a bayes bias that all messages
forwarded by your mail clients are spam, regardless of content.
Does this also mean that it is almost useless to share bayes from
one server to the next
Run 'spamassassin -D --lint' and look for a line like the following:
[18246] dbg: config: read file /etc/mail/spamassassin/init.pre
Thanks, I got...
debug: config: read file /etc/spamassassin/init.pre
But the only thing in that file NOT commented is the loading of 3 plugins
(spf, hashcash
Hello list,
I've seen a sharp increase in spam that is really easy to identify, but
I'm struggling to get SA to do so. One example is
The To: header matches:
/^([EMAIL PROTECTED])@(?:regexp-of-my-local-domains)$/
The Subject matches:
/^Fw: Discount for (\S+)/
and the $1 capture in
Christoph Söllner wrote:
Hi folks,
I'm having some trouble getting the bayes filter
to work on my windows installation. SA 3.1.0 is
installed and working properly, the ESA fires on
every received message and calls spamassassin.bat.
Bayes DB trained with 260 HAMs and 2600 SPAMs ^^.
When
Hoppe someone can help me!!
Iam using Spamassassin 3.0.1
( users stored in mysql and vpopmail and qmail).
Slackware version 10.2
Mysql version 5.0
My problem:
when i use the standart bayes confs ( hard drive .db files) everything
works so fine..
When i change to bayes MYSQL. strange things
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
User Sam and Joe has internet access via DSL with a dynamic ip
address. The mail going from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] is
identified as SPAM because the sending ip address is the dynamic dial
up address.
The solution is twofold:
1) Don't scan outgoing mail
Gary W. Smith wrote
-Original Message-
From: Webmaster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 11:59 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: bayes DBM versus SQL
Those of you you have used both native DBM and new SQL
bayesian, can
you comment on
-Original Message-
From: Steven Stern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: March 2, 2006 5:13 AM
To: spamass
Subject: Re: bayes DBM versus SQL
Webmaster wrote:
Those of you you have used both native DBM and new SQL
bayesian, can
you comment on benefits of one versus the other
Jeremy wrote:
I use SpamAssassin on Windows with no Perl/CYGWIN environment (via
MDaemon) which means I can't use RDJ, so I found and customised a
reasonably advanced batch file which automatically checks for newer
versions of the SA rules I want, and downloads them if there are new
versions
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: March 2, 2006 8:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: question on training spamassassin
Webmaster wrote:
Also if your users are only or mostly forwarding spam,
SA's
James Smith wrote:
Run 'spamassassin -D --lint' and look for a line like the following:
[18246] dbg: config: read file /etc/mail/spamassassin/init.pre
Thanks, I got...
debug: config: read file /etc/spamassassin/init.pre
But the only thing in that file NOT commented is the loading of
James Smith wrote:
I am having some trouble finding the spamassassin config files on my system.
I have got /etc/mail/spamassassin with local.cf and init.pre, I have
/etc/spamassassin
^
Ah, Debian. :/
I am using Ubuntu with VHCS if that helps.
OK, a Debian derivative.
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Had another hangup today. Should I comment on the bug report, or just
reply here, and note http://www.gushi.org/maillog.txt
-Dan
Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
Hey All,
I've been running the latest spamd for months now, and it seems to be
Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Had another hangup today. Should I comment on the bug report, or just
reply here, and note http://www.gushi.org/maillog.txt
If you're seeing this again...
Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
Feb 10 08:57:40 quark
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Had another hangup today. Should I comment on the bug report, or just
reply here, and note http://www.gushi.org/maillog.txt
If you're seeing this again...
Dan
Kelson wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
User Sam and Joe has internet access via DSL with a dynamic ip
address. The mail going from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] is
identified as SPAM because the sending ip address is the dynamic dial
up address.
The best solution would be to make
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 01:33:24PM -0500, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
Here's the errors I'm currently seeing that do not seem right to me:
1) An error relating to Textcat that I can find no real documentation on
in the wiki or the docs, and reading the source does not imply specifying
Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Had another hangup today. Should I comment on the bug report, or
just reply here, and note http://www.gushi.org/maillog.txt
If
Sounds like you didn't kill spamd first.
this is my top:
7091 root 9 0 20092 1096 1096 S 0.0 0.1 0:01.17 spamd
7303 backuppc 8 0 5468 3364 1124 S 0.0 0.3 1:02.43 BackupPC
7315 backuppc 9 0 3032 1536 1100 S 0.0 0.1 0:07.87 BackupPC_trashC
7428 root 9 0 38596
I'm moving our mail server to a new machine with current versions of
SpamAssassin amd Amavis-new. Can I just copy over the .spamassassin
directory containing all the bayes stuff and the autowhitelist or should
I start fresh? The old SA is 2.63.
thanks,
--
Charles Farinella
Appropriate
Graham Murray wrote:
Robert Nicholson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
Is there a rule that says that any message without a message-id is SPAM ie.
one who's SCORE I can increase.
I've got a spammer sending messagegs without message-id's.
Just change the score for MSGID_FROM_MTA_ID.
It is graded 5 here. I overrode the perceptron score. So far I have not seen
a false positive that got a BAYES_99 score. I've seen a very small number of
false negatives in spite of the BAYES_99 score.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: Martin Hepworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Seems to produce
From: Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Monnerie wrote:
http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/173910/e7bf95a7cb044637/
They are wondering why bayes_99 is not given 5 points by default, as it
seems to have no FP.
Statisticaly speaking, 1% of BAYES_99 hits should be nonspam.In reality,
it does
From: Dojja [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cami wrote:
Hi All,
A specific message is hitting the following rule:
* 5 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL listed in the SBL blocklist
* [URIs: annealbatross.org]
The sender would like to know how to fix it and i
am unable to find any
After upgrading to 3.1 from 3.0 we are starting to see the following
error messages in our logs prefork: server reached --max-clients
setting, consider raising it
I have looked through the list archives and tried the suggestions that I
have found. (adjusting the max children numbers) But still no
Spamd startup options - -d -q -m 50 -x --
siteconfigpath=/etc/mail/spamassassin -i xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx -A xxx.xxx.xxx.
-u spamd
There's a disconnect between the spamd man page and what the error log
reports. What you're looking to change is the -m option in your startup. The
man page lists that
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:16 AM, mouss wrote:
Jeremy a écrit :
I use SpamAssassin on Windows with no Perl/CYGWIN environment
do you mean you managed to run SA without perl? if so, how?
No, he's running SA from MDaemon, which has some form of an internal
SA engine, but uses the same basic
I run SA... Well the SA libraries wrapped in a .NET assembly. Then used in
an in-house windows port of spamd.
I run the whole thing in an exchange sink, so every message coming into the
exchange server is checked via spamd-nt, takes about a second or less for
each message to be checked; plus gives
Greetings,
It appears Apple's Mac OS X 10.3 (Panther) Security Update 2006-001
has killed my SA 3.1.0. After the update, upon starting spamd this is
what happens:
Mar 3 14:05:00 localhost spamd[15757]: spamd: server started on UNIX
domain socket /tmp/spamd.sock (running version
51 matches
Mail list logo
