Re: SPF rules and my domain

> My response was based on how you worded your question, which has been > removed from the thread now: > > > > > Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered > > > > > > > > > when an incoming email using my domain is received by a server > > > > > > > > > that is not in my

Re: Trying to understand how bayes works.

On 12/10/15 18:31, Benny Pedersen wrote: Marc Perkel skrev den 2015-12-10 22:54: I've had bayes disabled in SA because it seems to not be able to stay working in a high volume situation. The MySQL server can't seem to keep up with it even on very fast computers. i got a palm Zire that can do

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Hi, On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 10:28 AM, John Hardin wrote: > On Thu, 10 Dec 2015, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > >>> > My response was based on how you worded your question, which has been >>> > removed from the thread now: >>> > > > > > Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be trigg

Re: Trying to understand how bayes works.

On Fri, 11 Dec 2015 03:31:56 +0100 Benny Pedersen wrote: > if z is scored as spam, and x and y is ham, then its ham basicly > that how bayes works, but a single mail might be lots of digest to > compare for this to say spam or not The thing is, the probability of token Y is not independent of th

Re: Trying to understand how bayes works.

Marc Perkel skrev den 2015-12-10 22:54: I've had bayes disabled in SA because it seems to not be able to stay working in a high volume situation. The MySQL server can't seem to keep up with it even on very fast computers. i got a palm Zire that can do ocr on handwrited text :=) pretty good for

Re: Trying to understand how bayes works.

On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 13:54:05 -0800 Marc Perkel wrote: > But what about combinations of tokens? I'm thinking that I'd like to > have something that says when it sees tokens X and Y and Z then > that's spam even though X,Y,Z might be in ham when not combined. The SpamAssassin Bayes implementation

Re: Trying to understand how bayes works.

On 12/10/2015 10:54 PM, Marc Perkel wrote: I've had bayes disabled in SA because it seems to not be able to stay working in a high volume situation. The MySQL server can't seem to keep up with it even on very fast computers. Redis is your friend. Redis over the wire is faster than any local SDB

Trying to understand how bayes works.

I've had bayes disabled in SA because it seems to not be able to stay working in a high volume situation. The MySQL server can't seem to keep up with it even on very fast computers. But - thinking about trying something interesting - doing my own bayes in a different way. Here's my question.

Re: Try my IXHASH

On 12/10/15 10:58, Bill Cole wrote: On 10 Dec 2015, at 13:25, Paul Stead wrote: On 10/12/15 18:23, Paul Stead wrote: On 10/12/15 17:24, Bill Cole wrote: On 10 Dec 2015, at 10:48, Paul Stead wrote: 0.004% hit rate on ham Clarify this please: 4 out of 100k hits are ham (not so bad) OR 4 ou

Re: Try my IXHASH

On 10 Dec 2015, at 13:25, Paul Stead wrote: On 10/12/15 18:23, Paul Stead wrote: On 10/12/15 17:24, Bill Cole wrote: On 10 Dec 2015, at 10:48, Paul Stead wrote: 0.004% hit rate on ham Clarify this please: 4 out of 100k hits are ham (not so bad) OR 4 out of 100k hams get hit (OUCH) The

Re: EmailBL.pm error, anyone knows?

On December 10, 2015 4:33:25 PM Jari Fredriksson wrote: no such acl defined: freemail at /etc/spamassassin/EmailBL.pm line What might be it? disable that plugin, search .cf or .pre files where that .pm is loadplugin'ed possible this is missing emailbl.cf file with defs of the plugin ?,

Re: SPF rules and my domain

On December 10, 2015 3:49:56 PM Alex wrote: whitelist_from_spf: *@example.tld (your domain) header Return-Path =~ example.tld That's great. I'll investigate. or blacklist_from *@* with whitelist_auth *@* to hate all equal :)

Re: Net::DNS 1.0x should be avoided with SA 3.4.1

--On Wednesday, December 09, 2015 1:27 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: In testing in my lab, I've found significant issues using SpamAssassin 3.4.1 with Net::DNS 1.02 or later. Previously, I was using 0.81. This appears to be Wi

Re: Try my IXHASH

On 10/12/15 18:23, Paul Stead wrote: On 10/12/15 17:24, Bill Cole wrote: On 10 Dec 2015, at 10:48, Paul Stead wrote: 0.004% hit rate on ham Clarify this please: 4 out of 100k hits are ham (not so bad) OR 4 out of 100k hams get hit (OUCH) The former, 4 out of 100k hit are ham emails Re-cl

Re: Try my IXHASH

On 10/12/15 17:24, Bill Cole wrote: On 10 Dec 2015, at 10:48, Paul Stead wrote: 0.004% hit rate on ham Clarify this please: 4 out of 100k hits are ham (not so bad) OR 4 out of 100k hams get hit (OUCH) The former, 4 out of 100k hit are ham emails -- Paul Stead Systems Engineer Zen Internet

Re: Try my IXHASH

Am 10.12.2015 um 18:24 schrieb Bill Cole: On 10 Dec 2015, at 10:48, Paul Stead wrote: 0.004% hit rate on ham Clarify this please: 4 out of 100k hits are ham (not so bad) OR 4 out of 100k hams get hit (OUCH) what exactly is ouch here? razor, pyzor and what not else hits that rate ham all

Re: Try my IXHASH

On 10 Dec 2015, at 10:48, Paul Stead wrote: 0.004% hit rate on ham Clarify this please: 4 out of 100k hits are ham (not so bad) OR 4 out of 100k hams get hit (OUCH)

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Benny Pedersen wrote: > Alex skrev den 2015-12-10 03:42: > >> If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts >> against my domain, how would I do that? >> Can I create a meta that combines SPF_FAIL with the From header for my >> domain to do this? > > setup pypolicyd-spf is not

Re: SPF rules and my domain

On Dec 10, 2015 at 16:13 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: =>Am 10.12.2015 um 15:56 schrieb Alex: =>> I thought it was related to the sending domain, which it was, but I =>> later learned one of the includes in our domain was also apparently =>> expanded, and caused our SPF record to temporarily exceed

Re: Try my IXHASH

Here's some quick stats from our servers: Hits on 0.16% of all email Hits 2.5% of spam detected 58% overlap with my iXhash implementation 0.004% hit rate on ham Paul On 10/12/15 14:52, Rick Macdougall wrote: On 2015-12-09 11:58 AM, Marc Perkel wrote: On 12/09/15 05:50, Rick Macdougall wrote:

Re: EmailBL.pm error, anyone knows?

On 12/10/2015 04:32 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote: I have these in my logs for a long time, but did not bother to investigate... no such acl defined: freemail at /etc/spamassassin/EmailBL.pm line What might be it? You can kill that It was part of the experimental Emailbl.me thingie which n

EmailBL.pm error, anyone knows?

I have these in my logs for a long time, but did not bother to investigate... no such acl defined: freemail at /etc/spamassassin/EmailBL.pm line What might be it? -- jarif.bit

Re: SPF rules and my domain

On Thu, 10 Dec 2015, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > My response was based on how you worded your question, which has been > removed from the thread now: > > > > > Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered > > > > when an incoming email using my domain is received by a

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Am 10.12.2015 um 15:56 schrieb Alex: Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered when > > > an incoming email using my domain is received by a server that is > > > not in > > my SPF record. The SPF fail SHOULD be triggered in that case. But in your first mail you hav

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Am 10.12.2015 um 15:47 schrieb Alex: data in spf must be with all mynetworks in postfix except all non routeble ips such as rfc1918 in the spf for mydestination and virtual domains Doesn't that introduce a trust issue with include: for example? We're including constant-contact, salesforce, et

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Am 10.12.2015 um 15:43 schrieb Alex: Hi, If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts against my domain, how would I do that? Simply put all approved mail servers that you allow to send email with an envelope-from domain of your domain in your SPF record and it won't ma

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Hi, > > Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered when > > > > > > an incoming email using my domain is received by a server that is > > > not in > > my SPF record. > > The SPF fail SHOULD be triggered in that case. But in your first mail you > have mentioned T_SPF_PERMERROR

Re: Try my IXHASH

On 2015-12-09 11:58 AM, Marc Perkel wrote: On 12/09/15 05:50, Rick Macdougall wrote: Hi, The messages it flags are messages that would have been caught without it. About 2% of messages it flags are not seen by any other markers. Regards, Rick Any false positives? I suppose catching the

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Hi, >> If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts >> against my domain, how would I do that? >> >> Can I create a meta that combines SPF_FAIL with the From header for my >> domain to do this? > > This all sounds like: > > I (Alex) want to use SPF for incoming email, and scor

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Hi, >> If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts >> against my domain, how would I do that? >> Can I create a meta that combines SPF_FAIL with the From header for my >> domain to do this? > > setup pypolicyd-spf is not that hard is it ? I mentioned previously that there we

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Hi, >>If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts >>against my domain, how would I do that? > > Simply put all approved mail servers that you allow to send email with an > envelope-from domain of your domain in your SPF record and it won't > matter what the receiving server i

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Yes, understood. This was always about my own MTA receiving a message appearing to be "FROM" my own domain, and my own SPF record would be used to check the IP of the remote system to determine if it was permitted. I may have made that especially clear at one point. Does this make sense now? I'm

Re: SPF rules and my domain

Am 10.12.2015 um 03:42 schrieb Alex: If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts against my domain, how would I do that? Can I create a meta that combines SPF_FAIL with the From header for my domain to do this? SPF *is not* about the From-Header signature.asc Descrip