Re: Tool for validating sender address as spam-fighting technique?

Wolfgang what happens if I put one such thing on my mailserver too and want to send you a mail? My outgoing MX starts a smtp connection, and then, at RCPT TO, your system starts a smtp dialogue with my incoming MX. Unless the machines are tightly coupled, my incoming MX does not expect to get

Pyzor and Spamassassin 3.0.6

Hello. This is driving me nuts. After installing DCC, Razor2 and Pyzor and then running: spamassassin -D sample-spam.txt at the end of the test, I get: debug: tests=AWL,DCC_CHECK,DIGEST_MULTIPLE,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL,GTUBE,NO_RECEIVED,NO_RELAYS,RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100,RAZOR2_CHECK plus:

Re: Tool for validating sender address as spam-fighting technique?

Bob Proulx wrote: Sietse van Zanen wrote: Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: Kelly Jones wrote: To fight spam, I want to validate the address (not necessarily in real-time) of the a given email sender. Is there a Unix tool that does this? Postfix has exactly this built in. It's the

Re: Tool for validating sender address as spam-fighting technique?

Matt Hampton wrote: Wolfgang what happens if I put one such thing on my mailserver too and want to send you a mail? My outgoing MX starts a smtp connection, and then, at RCPT TO, your system starts a smtp dialogue with my incoming MX. Unless the machines are tightly coupled, my incoming MX

Re: Tool for validating sender address as spam-fighting technique?

for what it's worth, I would suggest *not* adopting this as an anti-spam technique. Sender-address verification is _bad_ as an anti-spam technique, in my opinion. Basically, there's one obvious response for spammers looking to evade it -- use real sender addresses. Where's an easy place to find

RE: Tool for validating sender address as spam-fighting technique?

You're going to get bounce blowback anyhow, whether you use SAV or not. Using Recipient Address Validation (or any kind of reject at the gateway level without first scanning for spam) would also increase blowback if junk mail is being sent via relays. No Address validation at the gateway - this

Re: Pyzor and Spamassassin 3.0.6

Mick wrote: Hello. This is driving me nuts. After installing DCC, Razor2 and Pyzor and then running: I'm wondering why you're setting up 3.0.6 instead of something more modern. but there is no mention of PYZOR adding to the score whatsoever (unless it's hidden in DIGEST_MUTIPLE perhaps?),

Re: Tool for validating sender address as spam-fighting technique?

Randal, Phil wrote: You're going to get bounce blowback anyhow, whether you use SAV or not. Using Recipient Address Validation (or any kind of reject at the gateway level without first scanning for spam) would also increase blowback if junk mail is being sent via relays. No Address validation

Training SA-Migrating from old IMAP to new IMAP server

I'm my email over from the services of fusemail.com to the IMAP server that comes with my shared hosting account. When I copy my messages over from the old server, do I just run SA-learn against the messages as they are? Or will the fact that they have fusemail headers in them cause SA to

Re: dkim: lookup failed: DNS query timeout for _policy._domainkey.joysticktowers.com

On 3/10/07, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For some reason when this happens fetchmail will not delete the message after downloading it therefore it just sits there and get downloaded over and over again and prevents othere mail after it from being downloaded. Could this be a) a fetchmail

sa-learn seems not to be teaching anymore

[Please Cc: me on reply, as I'm not subscribed to the list.] Hello everyone! I am using SA 3.1.7 from Debian testing packages. Some time ago (possibly with the last or second last update), sa-learn stopped to actually feed information into the database. I have been running sa-learn from Cron

protocol error in spamassassin

Hiya Has anyone come across error like these before - spamassassin was working perfect - but a couple of days ago - we got flooded with spam. Checking the logs ... errors like the one below come up 25,000 times :-) ... The only solution i've found to work is to keep restarting spamd on a crond

Re: [2] protocol error in spamassassin

I think you misunderstand. the error message is entirely normal and not indicative of a bug. it's produced when something (such as monitoring software!) opens a TCP connection to the spamd port, then closes it again. --j. gable writes: we have monitoring in place .. zabbix in this case ..

sa-compile usage questions

some questions about sa-compile usage: (1) how do we verify that the compiled rules are working? is a 'healthy' --lint sufficient? (2) how do/should we meaure the improved (hopefully) performance due to the compiled rules? (3) do compiled rules automatically take precedence over uncompiled

Re: No RBL checks

i think my spamassassin is performing no RBL checks, i disabled that once, reset that change but it seems that the RBL are still not working Have you remove -L from the setup of SA?