Matthias Leisi wrote:
Hello List,
How would you set up a distributed Bayes DB?
In this context, distributed means that I have four mailserver
machines in parallel (all with equal MX priority) where I want to run
Spamassassins Bayes filtering -- without introducing a single point of
failure
Matt Kettler wrote:
Do you see additional options?
Use a SQL server backend. If you must have a no-failure option for the
bayes DB, use a cluster of SQL servers.
[..]
Also see the SQL readme:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BetterDocumentation/SqlReadmeBayes
I already took a look
From: Steve Lake [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ok, remember that Name Wrote: :) emails? They've completely
changed. Now it's hi username instead. Joy, oh joy. Can anyone find
any common elements in these emails because whoever this putz is, they're
adapting a lot. They hit us, we adapt, they
-Original Message-
From: Matthias Leisi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 4:48 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Distributed Bayes DB?
Matt Kettler wrote:
Do you see additional options?
Use a SQL server backend. If you must have
Hi,
Need some inputs from the experts.
I am planning to switch to postfix + mailscanner + sa +
clamav. Just want to know one thing before doing that. I have kaspersky linux
edition. Can I create two antivirus scanning layers in mailscanner?
Warm Regards,
Suhas
System
Matthias Leisi wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
Do you see additional options?
Use a SQL server backend. If you must have a no-failure option for the
bayes DB, use a cluster of SQL servers.
[..]
Also see the SQL readme:
Michael Scheidell wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Matthias Leisi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 4:48 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Distributed Bayes DB?
Matt Kettler wrote:
Do you see additional options?
Use a
Yes you can, and many of us MailScanner
users do run two or more virus scanners.
You should join the MailScanner user's
mailing list, we're are a helpful lot.
Phil
From: Suhas
(QualiSpace) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006
10:17 AM
To:
Am 11.11.2006 um 10:48 schrieb Matthias Leisi:
I already took a look at using SQL, but this quote:
| NB: This should be considered BETA, and the interface, schema, or
| overall operation of SQL support may change at any time with future
| releases of SA.
stops me from using it.
Suhas (QualiSpace) wrote:
Hi,
Need some inputs from the experts.
I am planning to switch to postfix + mailscanner + sa + clamav. Just want to
know one thing before doing that. I have kaspersky linux edition. Can I
create two antivirus scanning layers in mailscanner?
A) probably
Matthias Leisi wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
Do you see additional options?
Use a SQL server backend. If you must have a no-failure option for the
bayes DB, use a cluster of SQL servers.
[..]
Also see the SQL readme:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BetterDocumentation/SqlReadmeBayes
I
But most of us aren't clever enough with Perl RE's to construct the rule
to go with it.
So where's the rule to match, folks?
Cheers,
Phil
-Original Message-
From: Tony Finch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Finch
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 9:49 PM
To: Steve Lake
Cc:
Charlie Clark wrote:
Am 11.11.2006 um 10:48 schrieb Matthias Leisi:
I already took a look at using SQL, but this quote:
| NB: This should be considered BETA, and the interface, schema, or
| overall operation of SQL support may change at any time with future
| releases of SA.
stops me
Dhawal Doshy wrote:
Matthias Leisi wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
Do you see additional options?
Use a SQL server backend. If you must have a no-failure option for the
bayes DB, use a cluster of SQL servers.
[..]
Also see the SQL readme:
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 5:23 AM
To: Michael Scheidell
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Distributed Bayes DB?
Actually his point wasn't the SQL clustering was beta, but
that the SQL Readme on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Rudd wrote:
decoder wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Rudd wrote:
D.J. wrote:
On 11/10/06, Patrick Sneyers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I get this warning: plugin: failed to create instance of plugin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
sokka wrote:
Hi,
Can anyone post me URL or PDF of clear documentation of the
FuzzyOcr ?
The current URL for FuzzyOcr is http://fuzzyocr.own-hero.net/
The page (wiki) is still quite under construction, but you'll find
installation instructions
unsubscribe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Pascal Maes wrote:
Version 2.3b
1) Here is the ouptut of the scanner (gocr -i) :
_
date Informations
9- 11-lO061O_30 Le __ek-end du 3-4r'11, les adresses de cou
r_er jlectron_que des jtud_ants non
Don't overrate Bayes. Don't focus solely on a bullet-proof highly
available clustered or replicated database. If the Bayes database is
gone, only one check is gone! All the others are still there.
For my mail content, the real filtering power today come from the
network checks such as
Loren Wilton writes:
Well, that's all fine and dandy, but what do we do about them?
Since we know they all have a common element, we need to figure out a way
to stop them using that info.
Well, just from the description and knowing the existance of header ALL,
it would be
Loren Wilton writes:
Ok, remember that Name Wrote: :) emails? They've completely
changed. Now it's hi username instead. Joy, oh joy. Can anyone find
any common elements in these emails because whoever this putz is, they're
adapting a lot. They hit us, we adapt, they
First, a thank you all for the suggestions relating to SQL. It seems SQL
support is better than I expected and I will give it a try.
Alex Woick wrote:
Don't overrate Bayes.
The system has been running without Bayes for roughly 3 years (with
incremental Spamassassin updates), and with good
Am 11.11.2006 um 11:47 schrieb Matt Kettler:
I suppose you could use something like NFS so that all systems share
the same DB, config files, etc.
NFS would be HIGHLY not -recommended.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general/72362/
match=sql
In fact, I personally
I have searched for several hours and can't seem to find the answer to this. I've found close answers, but not complete.I have SA set up as individual users. When a new user is created SA creates a new user_prefs file for them. This file contains two prefs. required_score 7 and rewrite_header
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
decoder wrote:
Pascal Maes wrote:
Version 2.3b
1) Here is the ouptut of the scanner (gocr -i) :
_
date Informations
9- 11-lO061O_30 Le __ek-end du 3-4r'11, les adresses de cou
r_er jlectron_que des
Matthias Haegele wrote:
pinoyskull schrieb:
will it be ok if i have 1000+ spam learned and only 300+ ham learned,
will it still be effective?
Dont know. But i think it´s better if you learn *all* spam and ham ...
that's my problem, spams overwhelmed ham on our server
(If your spam-ham-ratio
-Original Message-
From: pinoyskull [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 9:55 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: question about bayes database
(If your spam-ham-ratio is really that bad perhaps you want to use
some MTA-level antispam, or
Michael Scheidell wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 5:23 AM
To: Michael Scheidell
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Distributed Bayes DB?
Actually his point wasn't the SQL clustering was
Hi,
I was getting hit by a great deal of spam that only hits the BAYES_99
rule, and maybe gets less than a point or so from elsewhere.
But now I'm getting ones through that are basically only hitting the
BAYES_99 and nothing else;
X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (***) BAYES_99
I tried to send the mail to
On Sat, November 11, 2006 11:16, Suhas \(QualiSpace\) wrote:
Need some inputs from the experts.
experts is on mailscanner mail lists
I am planning to switch to postfix + mailscanner + sa + clamav. Just want to
know one thing before doing that. I have kaspersky linux edition. Can I
create
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Sat, November 11, 2006 11:16, Suhas \(QualiSpace\) wrote:
Need some inputs from the experts.
experts is on mailscanner mail lists
I am planning to switch to postfix + mailscanner + sa + clamav. Just want to
know one thing before doing that. I have kaspersky linux
Suhas (QualiSpace) wrote:
Hi,
Need some inputs from the experts.
I am planning to switch to postfix + mailscanner + sa + clamav. Just
want to know one thing before doing that. I have kaspersky linux
edition. Can I create two antivirus scanning layers in mailscanner?
Yes. I use 3
Tom H wrote:
Hi,
I was getting hit by a great deal of spam that only hits the BAYES_99
rule, and maybe gets less than a point or so from elsewhere.
But now I'm getting ones through that are basically only hitting the
BAYES_99 and nothing else;
X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (***) BAYES_99
I tried to
In my case the rule is designed to catch UK recruiters who are always
contacting me.
This isn't the only way I trap spam obviously.
Another thing I just realized is that this only looks for URI's in
the email itself in order to determine if they reside in the UK.
Something different from
When will the Shortcircuit feature be made available in a release?
Sounds to me as if the iXhash mechanism might be what you need.
The iXhash plugin you find on the SA wiki works on the body of a mail, removes
(redundant) parts of it and computes a hash value from the rest. The results
have been found to be quite a reliable indicator for spam mails. I feed two
Theo Van Dinter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 11:31:31PM -0500, Debbie D wrote:
Is sa-update something built in or is it an plug-in??
It's a script that comes with 3.1.
I ran sa-update service spamassassin restart
and was told
On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 03:08:08PM -0500, Debbie D wrote:
OK thanks Theo.. what would be the best way for the to triple verify indeed
it is picking up these new rules?? I'll set this to cron today on a weekly
basic I think.. is that frequent enough??
spamassassin --lint -D will show what
--On Saturday, November 11, 2006 3:20 PM -0500 Theo Van Dinter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
spamassassin --lint -D will show what rule files are being used.
Weekly is probably a good choice, daily is as frequent as I would suggest
at the moment.
It uses DNS to detect new updates, doesn't it? So
-Original Message-
From: Michael Frotscher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 6:19 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Running spamc via postfix not as user nobody
spamassassinunix - n n - - pipe
user=nobody
At 12:27 PM 11/11/2006 +, Justin Mason wrote:
ho hum... here we go again. :(
As I've noted several times recently -- these *are* being caught by rules
which were developed in the open -- namely RCVD_FORGED_WROTE, which has
been sitting in my sandbox for several weeks, was announced in a
-Original Message-
From: Dhawal Doshy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 5:54 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Distributed Bayes DB?
that should be DRBD
Or even geom_gate and geom_mirror on *BSD
Robert Nicholson wrote:
When will the Shortcircuit feature be made available in a release?
The Shortcircuit plugin should be available in 3.2.0. Recent messages
have suggested that this might be released before January.
Hey all,
I am trying to run spamassassin updates on a qmail toaster install
centos 4.4 but when I try it throws me this
error.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# sa-update -D
Can't locate LWP/UserAgent.pm in @INC (@INC
contains: /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib=
Hey all,
I am trying to run spamassassin updates on a qmail toaster install
centos 4.4 but when I try it throws me this
error.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# sa-update -D
Can't locate LWP/UserAgent.pm
[...]
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at /usr/bin/sa-update line 92.
Anyone Have any ideas?
Install LWP?
http://search.cpan.org/~gaas/libwww-perl-5.805/
Gary V
on Centos I think it's perl-libwww-perl
_
Get today's hot entertainment gossip
http://movies.msn.com/movies/hotgossip?icid=T002MSN03A07001
Hi,
I got the following in a message from our list management software:
*X-Spam-Status: * Yes, hits=9.7 tagged_above=0.0 required=6.3 tests=AWL,
BAYES_20, NO_RELAYS
*X-Spam-Level: * *
*X-Spam-Flag: * YES
Basic configuration:
Debian Sarge
Postfix
amavisd-new
spamassassin 3.001003
Miles Fidelman wrote:
Hi,
I got the following in a message from our list management software:
*X-Spam-Status: * Yes, hits=9.7 tagged_above=0.0 required=6.3
tests=AWL, BAYES_20, NO_RELAYS
*X-Spam-Level: * *
*X-Spam-Flag: * YES
Basic configuration:
Debian Sarge
Postfix
Robert Nicholson wrote:
When will the Shortcircuit feature be made available in a release?
I doubt that will be in 3.1.8.. sounds more like something for the 3.2.0
release.
Of course I could be wrong, but usually features that make a dramatic
change in how SA handles things are not done in
On Sat, November 11, 2006 22:49, Michael Scheidell wrote:
What happens with this:
user=${recipient} argv=/usr/bin/spamc -e /usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f
${sender} ${recipient}
unix accounts with @ in ?
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails.
On Sat, November 11, 2006 20:47, Dirk Bonengel wrote:
The fine thing is that you can use the iXhash plugin along razor, pyzor and
dcc. (I don't know if it's possible to use two pyzor servers from within
spamassassin, I think if you set up your own server you automatically lose the
capabilty
From: Justin Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Loren Wilton writes:
Ok, remember that Name Wrote: :) emails? They've completely
changed. Now it's hi username instead. Joy, oh joy. Can anyone find
any common elements in these emails because whoever this putz is, they're
adapting a lot.
From: Tom H [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I was getting hit by a great deal of spam that only hits the BAYES_99
rule, and maybe gets less than a point or so from elsewhere.
But now I'm getting ones through that are basically only hitting the
BAYES_99 and nothing else;
X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (***) BAYES_99
I am still trying to figure out why Bayes is giving so many false
positives.
0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db version
0.000 0 101467 0 non-token data: nspam
0.000 0 39694 0 non-token data: nham
0.000 0
Hi,
I'm trying to figure out how to whitelist control messages generated by
our list manager (Sympa) - which are generated on the localhost and sent
to addresses on the localhost.
In particular, here's a specific example:
*From: * [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Subject: *
56 matches
Mail list logo
