Matt Kettler writes:
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:07:43PM +, Justin Mason wrote:
The big question is, where do the devs think folks should go to get it?
from SVN directly, I guess.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/trunk/masses ...
On 1/31/2008 11:38 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
Matt Kettler writes:
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:07:43PM +, Justin Mason wrote:
The big question is, where do the devs think folks should go to get it?
from SVN directly, I guess.
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 13:30 +1000, David Hobley wrote:
I have a very bizarre issue here - we use Zimbra and its' built in
SpamAssassin to manage our Spam - we get a lot of Japanese emails in,
so I have configured
ok_languages en jp
Justin Mason wrote:
quick survey:
Is anyone using mass-check without previously having SVN set up?
Is this turning out to be a major barrier?
Should we put mass-check back into the distro?
Good survey, although I highly doubt anyone is using it that wouldn't be
able to get it from SVN with
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 10:38:03AM +, Justin Mason wrote:
Is this turning out to be a major barrier?
FWIW, there are at least two easy ways to get a full trunk download w/
mass-check and everything else:
svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/trunk
download a tarball from
Another option, if you are using postfix, is to setup mydomain.com as a
virtual. Then in /etc/postfix/virtuals, you can
mydomain.com virtual
@mydomain.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and so on... You can ommit the wildcard one if
On 1/31/08 at 10:38 AM + Justin Mason wrote:
Is anyone using mass-check without previously having SVN set up?
Yes, I am. I don't know what's involved in using SVN but I did look at the
SVN tree via the web and at first and second look, it wasn't obvious how to
use the web to easily download
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:07:03PM -0600, Larry Nedry wrote:
Is mass-check currently under development?
Yes and no. The masses directory, and therefore mass-check, are open for
development at any time. I don't think there's a lot of working going on at
any given time though.
Where is the
jp wrote:
Another option, if you are using postfix, is to setup mydomain.com as a
virtual. Then in /etc/postfix/virtuals, you can
mydomain.com virtual
@mydomain.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and so on... You can ommit the
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 09:56:49PM +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 20:12 +, Arthur Dent wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 08:22:55PM +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Sorry Chaps, I had no idea this topic would grow so much.
Do file-locking, when delivering to
John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 15:25 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 17:51 -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
Perhaps Verizon is screwing up their DNS?
Ahh, yes they are:
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1227
Hrm.
As a troubleshooting hack for this
I need to scan a set of archived mbox files for spam, mark the messages
appropriately, and save them in a second mbox file. Should the following
command do what I want?
spamassassin --mbox mbox scanned.mbox
I'm currently running spamc/spamd and know that works strictly one
message at a time, but
Apologies to everyone for wasting OT bandwidth. I have just re-read man
procmailrc and realised that a copy recipe is not considered to be a
delivery action and therefore does not need a lock.
Removing the lock from my backup copy solves the problem.
I just want to thank everyone for their
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Dallas Engelken wrote:
Or better yet, just fix the URIBLDNS plugin code to expect responses
matching ^127\.
Anything else is a dns monetizer.
Do any of the DNSBLs or URIBLs that return bitmapped results bitmap into
the first octet? If not, then this sounds like the
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 09:36:29PM +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 19:31 +, Arthur Dent wrote:
Apologies to everyone for wasting OT bandwidth. I have just re-read man
procmailrc and realised that a copy recipe is not considered to be a
delivery action and
Since I was about to hit the send button on this one, here is a shorter
version of my original thoughts. Partially on-topic (yay!) again. ;)
Fantastic! This worked perfectly out of the box! (just edited mydomain).
Good. :)
Thank you Guenther!
When I moved it from my test rig to the live
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 19:31 +, Arthur Dent wrote:
Apologies to everyone for wasting OT bandwidth. I have just re-read man
procmailrc and realised that a copy recipe is not considered to be a
delivery action and therefore does not need a lock.
Uhm, where did you read that? Clearly, even a
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 09:48:20PM +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Since I was about to hit the send button on this one, here is a shorter
version of my original thoughts. Partially on-topic (yay!) again. ;)
Oops - I was busy replying to your last message and didn't see this one come
in...
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 09:18:38PM +, Arthur Dent wrote:
I've just been doing a little reading..
# Spam filter
:0fw
* 256000
| /usr/bin/spamc --username=mark
If there is even the slightest chance, your MTA might flood your MDA
with mail during a peek -- add some
What should dig return? I too have Verizon fios. If /etc/resolve.conf
contains their DNS servers I get similar dig results as you. If I change
it to DNS servers I trust I get:
$ dig techweb.com.multi.surbl.org
; DiG 9.2.4 techweb.com.multi.surbl.org
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got
At 11:40 31-01-2008, John Hardin wrote:
Do any of the DNSBLs or URIBLs that return bitmapped results bitmap
into the first octet? If not, then this sounds like the best
solution, even though it doesn't give the administrator any feedback
that DNS hijacking is taking place...
This hijacking
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, David Zinder wrote:
What should dig return? I too have Verizon fios. If /etc/resolve.conf
contains their DNS servers I get similar dig results as you. If I change
it to DNS servers I trust I get:
$ dig techweb.com.multi.surbl.org
; DiG 9.2.4
If there is even the slightest chance, your MTA might flood your MDA
with mail during a peek -- add some explicit locking here, even though
this is not a delivery receipt (explicit, because it is a filter, and
procmail can't lock the target file). IIRC the SA docs do have a lock
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Arthur Dent wrote:
http://www.issociate.de/board/post/232336/Lock_failure_on_%22spamc.lock%22.html
and
http://www.ii.com/internet/robots/procmail/qs/#SA
which tend to suggest that one should NOT put a lock on for SA
processing...
A lock file is not *needed* for spamc
David Zinder wrote:
Is this a correct response from dig? If so, changing the DNS servers in
/etc/resolve.conf does not fix my problem. The techweb.com email is
still reported on the blocklists.
Did you restart SA after editing resolv.conf?
I have also tried dig from two other
email servers
Martin Gregorie wrote:
I need to scan a set of archived mbox files for spam, mark the messages
appropriately, and save them in a second mbox file. Should the following
command do what I want?
spamassassin --mbox mbox scanned.mbox
No, SA doesn't know how to split up messages for scanning;
NOTE I just realized I used consecutive a couple times in my previous
posts, whereas I did mean to say concurrent. Bad, bad screw up.
Sorry for any confusion caused.
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 20:57 +, Arthur Dent wrote:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 09:36:29PM +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 11:35:17PM +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
If there is even the slightest chance, your MTA might flood your MDA
with mail during a peek -- add some explicit locking here, even though
this is not a delivery receipt (explicit, because it is a filter, and
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 22:57 +, Arthur Dent wrote:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 11:35:17PM +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Thanks for this. I appreciate you taking the time to explain this. I respect
your opinion so I have the locks in place just as you suggest.
Incidentally, with those
Better yet, avoid being a victim of dns hijacking by accessing SURBL
URIBL (and other dnsbls!) via RSYNC. If implemented correctly, this will
result in performance gains as well!
--Rob McEwen
spamassassin --mbox mbox scanned.mbox
No, SA doesn't know how to split up messages for scanning; sa-learn
is the only SA component that can extract messages from an mbox mail
folder.
In that case, what does the --mbox option do? Not what I expected,
evidently.
If I accidentally mangled
David Zinder wrote:
What should dig return? I too have Verizon fios. If /etc/resolve.conf
contains their DNS servers I get similar dig results as you. If I
change it to DNS servers I trust I get:
$ dig techweb.com.multi.surbl.org
; DiG 9.2.4 techweb.com.multi.surbl.org
;; global options:
Martin Gregorie wrote:
spamassassin --mbox mbox scanned.mbox
No, SA doesn't know how to split up messages for scanning; sa-learn
is the only SA component that can extract messages from an mbox mail
folder.
In that case, what does the --mbox option do? Not what I expected,
Matt Kettler wrote:
Martin Gregorie wrote:
spamassassin --mbox mbox scanned.mbox
No, SA doesn't know how to split up messages for scanning; sa-learn
is the only SA component that can extract messages from an mbox mail
folder.
In that case, what does the --mbox option do? Not
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 05:53:57PM -0500, Kris Deugau wrote:
No, SA doesn't know how to split up messages for scanning; sa-learn is
the only SA component that can extract messages from an mbox mail folder.
Huh? SA, and spamassassin specifically, certainly does handle splitting up
mbox files
Martin Gregorie wrote:
spamassassin --mbox mbox scanned.mbox
No, SA doesn't know how to split up messages for scanning; sa-learn
is the only SA component that can extract messages from an mbox mail
folder.
In that case, what does the --mbox option do? Not what I expected,
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 07:23:19PM +, Martin Gregorie wrote:
I need to scan a set of archived mbox files for spam, mark the messages
appropriately, and save them in a second mbox file. Should the following
command do what I want?
spamassassin --mbox mbox scanned.mbox
Yes, though you can
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 07:22:48PM -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
Ok, open mouth, insert foot.. there *IS* a --mbox option to spamassassin
in the 3.2 branch. I'm not sure if it will output in mbox format.. you
can give it a shot and see if the new mailbox file works..
Yes, yes it will. The
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
--mbox
Specify that the input message(s) are in mbox format.
mbox is a standard Unix message folder format.
[...]
To pick a very small nit - 'mbox' isn't referring to a folder. It's a
file.
'maildir' could be called a folder format.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 06:47:43PM -0600, Bookworm wrote:
To pick a very small nit - 'mbox' isn't referring to a folder. It's a
file.
That depends if you're defining folder == directory, or if you're using the
standard MUA definition of folder which is just a place to store messages.
--
Looking at my stats I see those hitting LONGWORDS and scoring BAYES_50
or higher are all big time spam that have been hard to catch, see my
posts earlier this week 'bayes and celeb spam'. Would it be a bad idea
to add to the score when both hit? It looks like a score of 3.5 will be
needed for the
On Tuesday 29 January 2008 7:51 pm, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
http://esmtp.webtent.net/test2.txt
I have gone through my debug, but can't seem to spot any problems. How
can one send debug output to file? And what do you think I should be
looking for given the results of my test?
FWIW, on my
42 matches
Mail list logo
