Daniel Aquino wrote:
Is spam assassin smart enough to not auto-learn (bayesian) spam if the
default tests allready detect it as spam... ? What I'm wondering is
if the other tests have allready deamed it to be spam, then why would
you want to increase the size of your bayesian db... Bayesian
Peter Mikeska (MiKi) wrote:
Hello All,
I would like to ask for help ;)
I have relay server which is overloaded already and I have second
server which is powerfull. I want to use spamc -d ... used as plugin
so score which SA get from this (conenct to powerfull server to get
score) will be
Chris wrote:
Hi all,
I'm new to this board, so please go easy on me ;-)
I can see that this forum is an excellent source of
useful information with some very helpful members, but
am having a bit of a problem at my end, with organising
the emails coming in from the forum.
Been using
Anders Norrbring wrote:
I just ran into a big problem..
[25735] warn: bayes: database version is different than we understand
(3), aborting! at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Mail/SpamAssassin/BayesStore/SQL.pm
line 136
Any ideas please?
Anders
What version did you upgrade
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi list,
Not sure if it's entirely on-topic, but at least I want to monitor it
closely.
A while ago I implemented graylisting, which works quite well. But since
2 days ago I'm seeing loads of mails which are passing by the
greylisting (so they are being sent
Marc Perkel wrote:
As you know SA reports spam to various service like Pyzor, Razor,
Spamcop, etc. Why not have a module that sends messages to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] etc. If we had such
a module then these free email services could automatically shut down
Chris St. Pierre wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Marc Perkel wrote:
I agree it would have to be done right. Here's what I'm thinking is
that autoreporting could go to a screening system that would track
these auto generated complaints. A few complains wouldn't cause
anything to happen but lest
Spamassassin List wrote:
Spamassassin List wrote:
I am getting some errors when try to spamassassin -t email.txt
Subroutine FuzzyOcr::O_CREAT redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/POSIX.pm line 19
Subroutine FuzzyOcr::O_EXCL
jpff wrote:
Much to my regret I am having to abandon use of spamassassin. If I
include it in my mix (exin/spamassassin/clamav) then as soon it there
is a flurry of mail I get timeouts from spamd, and then errors about
deleteing unallocated memory in spamassassin, and no mail is
delivered.
dougp23 wrote:
I have a user IN the company, who loves to forward these large messages,
things like Check out these so cute puppies, and Photoshop Magic and
what not. Pure drivel.
Anyway, Can I tell SA to block sending email from jsmith when mutliple
jpgs attached or something like that?
Marc Perkel wrote:
There is a huge amount of traffic on the internet from bots that are
sending email to and from email addresses that don't exist and if that
could be eliminated then everyone would be ahead. I have a few ideas
myself on some evolutionary changes in the way mail is delivered
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2007 15:39, Marc Perkel wrote:
So - what I propose is a addition to the IMAP/POP protocols that allow
email to be sent out over IMAP/POP and eliminate SMTP for the end user.
NO, NO, NO! What is it, the tenth time you bring up this theme? Every time
Nigel Frankcom wrote:
Hi All,
As per the title, I'm seeing a pretty big rise this last week. So far
this week has seen the most spam I've ever had to deal with in over 10
years.
RBLs and SA are catching more, as is greylisting. That said, yesterday
saw double my 'usual' amount of spam.
Paul Aviles wrote:
There are are bunch of them about there. If someone is concern about
Paul getting hit by a bus, there are several thousands (literally) good
admins for hire on the net and several companies providing SA
services. I always wonder how the bosses got their jobs.
If they
David Flanigan wrote:
James,
Thanks for the reply. I was not planing on double scanning, the BCC idea is basically
the same, though I would be doing it vial the /etc/aliases mapping to make it
transparent. I am running Sendmail as the MTA.
The real question is how do to the spam check,
Paul Andrews wrote:
HI,
After whitelisting my own email address, it seems that spammers will
frequently put my own email address in the return path but not in the
from. Is it possible for Spam Assassin to make a distinction between
the two so that it will block such messages? Below is an
David Flanigan wrote:
Spam Guru’s:
I have a question that I am hoping one of you may be able to answer.
We run the latest version of SA running spamc/spamd with a global (not per user)
config, and tag messages as spam for latter filtering by the mail client, as is
appropriate. However, now
Phil Barnett wrote:
On Tuesday 12 December 2006 07:28, JamesDR wrote:
There is nothing in SPF to keep a spammer with a botnet from putting
0.0.0.0/0 as their approved domain limit.
Sounds like a good spam sign to me. Let the spammers put 0.0.0.0/0 in
their spf records, I'll pop in 3 points
James Davis wrote:
JamesDR wrote:
Even better. If they give me a giant subnet of SPF records, I know
exactly what IP's I don't want connecting to my mail server. If a
spammer sends a spam from a subnet, passes SPF. I will and have gone,
looked at their record and blocked what they say
John D. Hardin wrote:
What if they include the subnet containing AOL's outbound MX hosts?
Waitaminit, bad example...
:-D
What if they include the subnet containing Apache's outbound MX hosts?
As I said before, score on the total number of the hosts matched by
the SPF record. Anything
Phil Barnett wrote:
On Monday 11 December 2006 16:50, JamesDR wrote:
Would you care to elaborate on why SPF doesn't work for sender
verification? Its pretty simple, doesn't get much more simple that what
SPF does... If SPF doesn't work, nothing will.
There is nothing in SPF to keep a spammer
Robert LeBlanc wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Rudd wrote:
Robert LeBlanc wrote:
Connections arriving on port 25 can be assumed to come from
servers with MX records, so that becomes a testable assumption and a
precondition for connection.
There are two things that
John Rudd wrote:
JamesDR wrote:
SPF already does this
poorly.
We need something that actually works.
Would you care to elaborate on why SPF doesn't work for sender
verification? Its pretty simple, doesn't get much more simple that what
SPF does... If SPF doesn't work, nothing
Matthias Keller wrote:
John D. Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006, Matthias Keller wrote:
I'm curious.. as someone who ALSO runs a home mail server...
What's wrong with evolving best practices to require that our
outgoing email be channeled through our ISP's mail server, instead
of having
there are
the box independent configs -- name ip etc. But I'm sure with that
volume of mail, you have a system to keep all servers the 'same')
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
rtartar wrote:
I have some type of email mining where they send to a dictionary of names and
combos to [EMAIL PROTECTED] What is the best way to combat this?
Thanks
Don't accept mail for invalid users.
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Christian Quest wrote:
Are statistics that important ?
My setup is using only 2 RBLs directly in sendmail to reject
connections: dynablock and opm. This stops the zombies and home-made
spam delivery.
Then I use greylisting to block other fake SMTP servers.
Then I use spamassassin (thru
, but I've heard a couple of people
on the list mention it.
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Marc Perkel wrote:
Spam is never eliminated - just reduced. Most spam comes from virus
infected zombies that talk SMTP. If end users were by default set up so
that they can only send email by IMAP then you can block off SMTP ports
for end users isolating them from the SMTP world. That would
Marc Perkel wrote:
Nigel Frankcom wrote:
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 05:37:32 -0700, Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Why not just eliminate the SMTP protocol for end users and keep SMTP as
a server to server protocol and have users send theit email to the
server by extending POP/IMAP to
Marc Perkel wrote:
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 14:37, Marc Perkel took the opportunity to say:
Why not just eliminate the SMTP protocol for end users and keep SMTP as
a server to server protocol and have users send theit email to the
server by extending POP/IMAP to
Marc Perkel wrote:
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
SMTP passwords go away because SMTP goes away.
If the user doesn't store the password then they would type it in when
say Thunderbird first starts. At that point obly thunderbird, not the
virus program would have access to the IMAP port. If the
tomcatf14 wrote:
I am using the following:
SpamAssassin version 3.1.3
running on Perl version 5.8.7
rewrite_subject 1 is not recognise when running spamassassin -D --lint
You will want
rewrite_header Subject your message
your message without the and .
--
Thanks,
James
Jimmy Stewpot wrote:
Hello,
I am currently trying to configure spam assassin with some custom rules
to block certain words which are being used in a large amount of spam
that the email servers receive. When I put the following rules into the
local.cf file
body VIjAGRA /\bVIjAGRA\b/i
score
Jimmy Stewpot wrote:
Hello,
How do you clear the AWL and Bayes Lists is that just a case of deleting
the files or is there some special command to do that ?
Regards,
Jimmy
JamesDR wrote:
Jimmy Stewpot wrote:
Hello,
I am currently trying to configure spam assassin with some custom
rules
tomcatf14 wrote:
rewrite_header Subject your message-- this is my 1st line in the
local.cf file and it's uncommented.
I call SA from qmail-scanner. I used the whole package from qmailrocks.
In this page: http://freebsd.qmailrocks.org/clamspam.htm
The instruction is add:
rewrite_subject
. It goes back to what users will do, and what
they won't. Seems some will do what the spamer wants :-D
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Jack Gostl wrote:
I'm running SpamAssassin version 3.0.3 running on Perl version 5.8.2
under AIX 5.3. Starting a few months ago, I have been absolutely
inundated with image only spam. I've gone from catching 99% of the
spam with almost no false positives to less than 85%. I asked about this
aren't using SpamC? The
normal spamassassin script doesn't call SpamD. SpamC is the tool to use
to send mails to SpamD. Also, post the command line options for SpamC as
well (may help in showing why it isn't working like you think it should.)
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME
Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm not thinking links, What I want to do is whitelist based on the host
name of the server connecting to my server.
Why use the host name? They way I see it is you want to whitelist a
server, there already exists a way for SA to do a lookup based upon IP,
why not go that
boka wrote:
Hello,
is it possible to store global white/black lists in sql ?
I know that it is possible for users.
Yes, see the wiki pages for the sql userprefs. There is a query that
allows you to do Global, Domain, and User based prefs -- all depending
on how SA is getting the user of
) are for sites who are 'testing' (majority of the records
are this) and is (from my understanding) supposed to allow the mail to
be still delivered.
-all (hardfail) is more aggressive, but may cause lost mail
...
http://www.openspf.org/whitepaper.pdf
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S
in mind,
it seems most servers that implement SPF use softfail (~all).
HTH
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
to configure per user or domain scoring.
I haven't seen any specs on your system, can you post the MTA and how
you are calling SpamAssassin? This will help us help you.
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Jim Knuth wrote:
Hallo und Guten Tag spamassassin-users,
I suddenly get the following error
spamassin --lint
[8123] warn: config: failed to parse line, skipping: auto_whitelist_factory
Mail::SpamAssassin::SQLBasedAddrList
[8123] warn: config: failed to parse line, skipping: user_awl_dsn
and
above.)
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Irina wrote:
Hello all,
Really strange about this. A message was marked as spam with
URIBL_SBL Contains an URL listed in the SBL blocklist
* [URIs: mcleishorlando.com]
Checked at
http://www.rulesemporium.com/cgi-bin/uribl.cgi
it says it is not listed there.
I even went
in the dark I know, but SA isn't a MDA or a MUA, but a scanner.
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
JuNiOx wrote:
hi all
my spamassassin is adding *SPAM* in some messages witch isnt one!!
how can i fix it?
i would like configure to say it: hei, the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] is not spam, stop to change its subject
=)
Whitelist them.
--
Thanks,
James
JuNiOx wrote:
right... i saw something about that..
but... in my spamassassin there isnt whitelist or blacklist
how do i create them?
- Original Message -
From: JamesDR [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: its not spam
Edward Diener wrote:
Does anybody know the instructions for training SA with the contents of
the Thunderbird Junk folder ?
My web host, where SA is tunning, suggests I do this in order to reduce
the amount of spam I get, and I can login to my web host, transfer files
from my local machine to
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Want to install/compile 3.1.1 the first time. I tried on two different
linux systems and get
make: Nothing to be done for `Makefile.PL'.
make Makefile.PL for 3.1.0 is still okay.
I assume I'm missing something obvious? Nothing about different configure
instructions in the
When doing a lookup this is what I get (your internal DNS may be diff.):
Name:ns.museum.rain.com
Address: 65.75.198.49
HTH
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
Thanks for your reply.
My understanding is that 65.75.198.48/28 means that all IPs in that subnet
will be trusted. Your DNS server returns
a lookup this is what I get (your internal DNS may be diff.):
Name:ns.museum.rain.com
Address: 65.75.198.49
HTH
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Matt Kettler wrote:
Payal Rathod wrote:
Hi,
I am still getting many spams with Subject: The Ultimate Online
Pharmaceutical. Can someone suggest anything for them?
I canot attach the body here because then the list is rejecting my mail.
With warm regards,
-Payal
Here's a simple rule I use:
Vivek Khera wrote:
On Feb 23, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Mike Jackson wrote:
So, I suppose the question is: How do you deal with getting forwarded
mail through to AOL without being branded as a spammer?
You stop forwarding email to AOL... really.
Other option is to crank up the SA pickiness and
Payal Rathod wrote:
Hi,
From 4-5 days I have been receiving a lot of spams, 100s of them with
weird subjects like, Re: a f news 141, Re: K R news 721, Re: B l news
203 etc.
I have with bayes learned alteast 200 of them, but they are still pouring in.
Any ideas on their blocking?
With warm
Clay Davis wrote:
My ONLY gripe is the setup routine for SA. I don't know if the
commercial products have the SA code embedded so that the setup is
masked. But for less technical types (me), SA's setup is a bit
complicated. Has anyone rolled the SA setup into something similar to
Windows
,
JamesDR
Mike Pepe wrote:
I've been feeding messages from my inbox into a folder that SA reads as
ham for quite some time now.
Suddenly it occurs to me that this may be a bad idea, and I should only
have SA learn messages as ham that it believes is spam.
This strikes me as being as bad as forcing SA
M Bernasconi wrote:
Hello!
I want use SA on one e-mail address and not the hole domain. Let's say [EMAIL PROTECTED] should be scanned through SA. I know I can give the all_spam_to parameter to the hole domain [EMAIL PROTECTED] But then also [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not going to be checked for spam.
Matthew Yette wrote:
I currently am using SA 3.1.0 with ClamAV 0.87.1 and Qmail-scanner 1.25st.
I use SQL for my bayes as well as my user scores preferences databases. When
testing the whitelist_from preference, mail comes through just fine and is
recognized to be part of that preference and is
Mark Merchant wrote:
upgraded 3.0.4 to 3.1.0, spamassassin --lint produces:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] spamassassin]# spamassassin --lint
[1257] warn: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, /home/bayes/
is not valid for bayes_path, skipping: bayes_path _/home/bayes/
[1257] warn: config: failed to
notifications -- these are spam. I don't
want to hear if someone spoofed my address, and sent you a bazillion
emails with a virus attached -- not my problem. Check my SPF records,
that sender is not in the allowed list to send mails from. These I do
report.
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S
- use add_header
pyzor_add_header - not sure
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
, that if some RBL's hit, there are enough neg. scoring rules to
get that mail through, on time, where it needs to be (we are talking
$1K/hr here if that mail is NOT delivered because our spam filter
decided a good mail was bad because of a miss-configured remote server)
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok...I've been properly chastised. Forgive the resurgence of newbie-ism
on my part. :)
I've started getting complaints about e-mails that are are just a
graphic and a couple of hot spots, no text.
Does anyone know how to mark those as spam without whacking all of
Pierre Thomson wrote:
Aha, I was about to post something about that exact spam. We have been
receiving them in big batches, and some of the recipients have hardly got any
spam before. I'm guessing it's a new operator with a fresh list of addresses
from *somewhere*.
They always use this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I got a lot of this messages in my maillog.
Oct 4 08:27:13 server spamd[482]: prefork: server reached --max-clients
setting, consider raising it
Oct 4 08:27:13 server spamd[482]: prefork: server reached --max-clients
setting, consider raising it
Oct 4
Robert Blayzor wrote:
JamesDR wrote:
I got a lot of this messages in my maillog.
Oct 4 08:27:13 server spamd[482]: prefork: server reached
--max-clients setting, consider raising it
Oct 4 08:27:13 server spamd[482]: prefork: server reached
--max-clients setting, consider raising it
Oct 4
), this should give you more
available 'connections', but watch mem usage etc. These are all in the
man spamd page.
HTH
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Chris wrote:
On Saturday 01 October 2005 09:34 pm, JamesDR wrote:
Chris wrote:
I may have missed a thread on this but is there a reason that SA is now
placing its tags above the headers:
X-Spam-Virus: No
X-Spam-Seen: Tokens 251
X-Spam-New: Tokens 446
X-Spam-Remote: Host
Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
I'm getting some warning about the ok_languages config option. Did this
parameter has changed? I couldn't find it in the notes for upgrading to
SA 3.1.0
This is the output of spamassassin -D --lint:
[27255]
and I
use spamassassin 3.04 on redhat 9 with spamd/spamc..
Robert
Peace he would say instead of goodbyepeace my brother.
RTFM for rewrite_header, via the html doc pages, the answer is in the
first paragraph
HTH
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description
'localbl.cf' where I have a line for
each blacklist entry. It would be good to show the list some headers
where the blacklist_from is not hitting. Also, be sure you restart spamd
each time you add/change a setting from any file.
HTH
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic
anything in man or in the
upgrade notes.
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
(dir: /etc/mail/spamassassin) and use_bayes is set explicit to 1.
How can I figure out my problem?
Thanks
Mathias
Do a spmamassassin --lint -D and look for any bayes errors/calls. Post
back what you find.
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
don't
hit on it.
Next give your self a 'real name', you'll see I use JamesDR. These few
things will also help reduce your score to other persons who may be
running spamassassin.
This is what your mail scored (subject Rules Help Please)
No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=HTML_20_30
would like to see any of these scripts, let me know, I'll be more
than happy to share them with the community.
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
seeing these as well, ClamAV does the catching tho (before SA).
Think about at least installing ClamAV (FREE/OSS.)
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Rob McEwen wrote:
OBSERVATION:
Could some of us be treating unsolicited Business-to-Consumer and
unsolicited Business-To-Business the same? Should they be treated the same?
If not, the perhaps some people's irritation about getting called at
dinner-time for the 10th time by the same phone
Dr Robert Young wrote:
But you can use milter-spamc to direct all identified spam to an acct
such as [EMAIL PROTECTED], and then simply 'dump' the acct's email
periodically. Hence the inquiry
On Jul 28, 2005, at 8:14 PM, jdow wrote:
Please check with the ClamAV people. There is
Robert Swan wrote:
I have a pair of Spamassassin servers filtering e-mail (Spamassassin
3.0.4, spamd/spamc, Postfix, redhat 9) I was wondering if I could share
the bayes database between the two server rather than having each with
its own and having to do the salearn process twice.
Any
The Doctor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 03:48:22PM -0400, Jim Maul wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
SNIP irate customer message
All right, the short and simple is that Spam-Assassin may not be doing
the correct job. This user has a whitelist in place and
some e-mail are getting the label of
Frank M. Cook wrote:
I run spamd on a machine of it's own. the spamc is on a separate windows
computer (actually it's winspamc). it's version 3 of spamd. everything was
working fine until a week or so ago and then things started to back up
regularly. I'd look in the morning and thousands of
Dr Robert Young wrote:
Is there a good way to handle spam where the bulk of the ad is a
image file (jpg, gif, etc) that is attached to the email so that it
displays when the user opens the email?
Dr. Robert Young
ALI Database
jdow wrote:
From: Aecio F. Neto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have been trying to post to this list using my original subscriber
email address.
Unfortunately, It has been not possible up to now.
I am using a personal and secondary address to workaround a dumb rule,
assuming that all hosts under a
Keith Ivey wrote:
JamesDR wrote:
If you want to post to aol, your HELO MUST match your rdns (has been
in my case and a few others.)
Not true. I send messages to AOL all the time from a machine whose HELO
does not match its rDNS. Perhaps you mean that the HELO must be a valid
hostname
List Mail User wrote:
[snip]
Absolutely incorrect! Your HELO/EHLO must match your rDNS or the
rDNS needs to match an MX RR for your argument or a few other cases. AOL
is quite strict, but you have misinterpreted either their stated policy
and/or RFCs 2821 and 2822. In particular,
Chavdar Videff wrote:
Hi List,
Our mailserver server serves about 100 users. Our config:
Sendmail+Procmail+SpamAssassin.
The question is:
If I got it right, we should run sa-learn for each user in order to benefit
from bayes. We intend to run a cron job for each user and do it at night by
is port 53 TCP and UDP open (outbound), depending on what
firewall product you use, depends on how. A bit of Google with what
ports on what product will yield what you should need.
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm new to SA so I need a bit of help in configuring /training
SA-
The problem I have is that I do not keep any mail in the SA box- it forwards
to my mail server-
What method can I use to train it?
Jean-Paul Natola
Network Administrator
analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
I'm also curious as to why a 0 would get flagged as possible spam?
-Original Message-
From: JamesDR [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 4:53 PM
To: users
Felix Natter wrote:
I am experimenting with spamassassin (3.0.x) settings and for
this purpose I would like to see why some messages were not
recognized as spam (which tests matched and how many points
total), just like the information I get to see for positives.
Is there a way to achieve
the return info discarded. I could be totally wrong however
--
Thanks,
JamesDR
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Michael wrote:
[snip]
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: rewrite_subject 1
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: subject_tag [SPAM]
^ these are depreciated, see the conf. for what to use.
[snip]
Net::DNS version is 0.31, but need 0.34dnsavailable-1 at
Michael wrote:
[snip]
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: rewrite_subject 1
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: subject_tag [SPAM]
^ these are depreciated, see the conf. for what to use.
[snip]
Net::DNS version is 0.31, but need 0.34dnsavailable-1 at
It seems, at least from here, that -d doesn't remove markup. I run:
spamassassin -d testspam.mail
and what's given back is exactly the mail put into it. man spamassassin
says that this should remove any spamassassin markup and return the
message to it's almost org. state.
spamassassin -d
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 12:12:05PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
Hey, I'm just quoting Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf..
It doesn't make much sense to me either, but that's what the docs say.
/me makes commit
Well now the documentation says the right thing. ;)
Perhaps it's
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
