sending the entire message for scanning (was Re: spamc/spamd failure)

2008-01-02 Thread Justin Mason
Theo Van Dinter writes: On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 01:32:57AM +0100, Michael Grant wrote: Anyone else seen this? Anyone have a fix? man spamd It's suggested to not send messages to spamd that are 250K in size. Actually, it doesn't say this in the spamd man page at all. However,

Re: Issue with SpamAssassin (spamc only) over a FreeBSD Jail

2008-01-02 Thread Laurent LEVIER
At 02:36 29/12/2007, mouss wrote: what is smtpd-laurent? symlink hacks aren't recommended. if you want different logs, use multiple instances. That's a jail. If you dont setup something to discriminate process between them, 8 jails will produce 8 smtpd in the global ps view. Not very convenient

Re: Issue with SpamAssassin (spamc only) over a FreeBSD Jail

2008-01-02 Thread Laurent LEVIER
Hi Mouss, At 15:03 29/12/2007, mouss wrote: But they are not listening on the same IP:port, so you should see they have different arguments (-n 127.0.0.1:25 ...). My postfix is configured to listed on the jail-IP. This part of the tool works fine. The issue is not with postfix. As I said,

Delivery Status Notification - disable

2008-01-02 Thread Marius Vochin
Hello! How can I make spamassassin not to send DSN after a message is marked [SPAM]? I need to do this because I get lot of spam from spoofed adresses and for each message marked as [SPAM] a DSN is generated. Since the mail adress is spoofed I get back another DSN from the

Re: Delivery Status Notification - disable

2008-01-02 Thread mouss
Marius Vochin wrote: Hello! How can I make spamassassin not to send DSN after a message is marked [SPAM]? I need to do this because I get lot of spam from spoofed adresses and for each message marked as [SPAM] a DSN is generated. Since the mail adress is spoofed I get back

Re: sending the entire message for scanning (was Re: spamc/spamd failure)

2008-01-02 Thread Matt Kettler
Justin Mason wrote: Theo Van Dinter writes: It depends on your SA version. It used to be 256k, but apparently 3.2 upped it to 500k. not be an issue. These messages are well below 256M. milter-spamc only sends down the first 64K of the message in fact. Wow, that would

Re: sending the entire message for scanning (was Re: spamc/spamd failure)

2008-01-02 Thread Justin Mason
Matt Kettler writes: Justin Mason wrote: Theo Van Dinter writes: It depends on your SA version. It used to be 256k, but apparently 3.2 upped it to 500k. not be an issue. These messages are well below 256M. milter-spamc only sends down the first 64K of the message in

Question about getting a blacklist included in SA

2008-01-02 Thread Marc Perkel
I was wondering about how to get a blacklist included in the SA distribution. I have a blacklist and whitelist that are both very good. I've been publishing it for about a year now. But I have a few questions. What are the licensing requirements that I have to give to be included? I assume it

Re: DDOS, Dictionary Attack... not sure what it is...

2008-01-02 Thread Kelson
Mike Cisar wrote: Since about the 26th of Dec I've had one particular mailserver that has been dealing with a constant stream of crap... all emails to unknown users, all of the email addresses seem consistent (either 3 'syllables'... an uppercased 'syllable', a lowercased 'syllable' and another

Re: Question about getting a blacklist included in SA

2008-01-02 Thread John D. Hardin
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Marc Perkel wrote: Here's the info on my lists: http://wiki.ctyme.com/index.php/Spam_DNS_Lists Get somebody to proofread that page. -- John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a [EMAIL

Re: FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD

2008-01-02 Thread Loren Wilton
score FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD 0 Loren

Re: FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD

2008-01-02 Thread Randy Ramsdell
Loren Wilton wrote: score FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD 0 Loren Ok thanks turning it off works. I should edit the *.cf files or is there another way to turn it off instead of settings things up so updates kill off the setting? Anyway, I would think the rule is useful to some extent and if not,

Re: FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD

2008-01-02 Thread Loren Wilton
Ok thanks turning it off works. I should edit the *.cf files or is there another way to turn it off instead of settings things up so updates kill off the setting? Anyway, I would think the rule is useful to some extent and if not, why is it included with spamassassin? Put it in local.cf.

Re: FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD

2008-01-02 Thread Randy Ramsdell
Loren Wilton wrote: Ok thanks turning it off works. I should edit the *.cf files or is there another way to turn it off instead of settings things up so updates kill off the setting? Anyway, I would think the rule is useful to some extent and if not, why is it included with spamassassin? Put

Re: Question about getting a blacklist included in SA

2008-01-02 Thread Matt Kettler
Marc Perkel wrote: I was wondering about how to get a blacklist included in the SA distribution. I have a blacklist and whitelist that are both very good. I've been publishing it for about a year now. But I have a few questions. What are the licensing requirements that I have to give to be

Re: Question about getting a blacklist included in SA

2008-01-02 Thread Marc Perkel
Matt Kettler wrote: Marc Perkel wrote: I was wondering about how to get a blacklist included in the SA distribution. I have a blacklist and whitelist that are both very good. I've been publishing it for about a year now. But I have a few questions. What are the licensing requirements that

Spamassassin fallback to process owner.

2008-01-02 Thread Sven Juergensen (KielNET)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi list, i was posting this subject a while ago and recently had some time to look into it some more. Apparently, whenever $SOMETHING isn't part of the envelope and/or body, spamassassin falls back to the user which is owning the process. If that