lists, or if there's some other factor. I was thinking maybe overall
Internet spam was dropping, but from your replies last week, that
doesn't seem to be the case. Anyway, I guess we're doing *something*
right. :-)
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
is needed.
Me too. I'm a Debian user, so I'm sticking with 2.64 as long as it's
working well. Unless 3.X goes into Sarge, which I suspect is unlikely.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
.
Your system may be stable but the Internet is not.
Which is why good spam filtration and virus checking software gets
dynamic information from pattern update servers, RBLs, SURBL, Razor,
DCC, etc. etc. etc.
In a nutshell: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
Over the past month I've seen a ~25% dropoff in the amount of spam we're
receiving on a daily basis. Anyone else seeing a significant drop in
spam recently?
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
, but it was a fairly steady decline starting in
late November, so it may have been something else. I hope it doesn't
ramp up again, but who knows, maybe it was the holidays after all. I'll
post an update next week unless anyone objects.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
, so I can't vouch for how well it works, but
a quick Google search revealed that using the -r command-line option
to spamass-milter in the /etc/init.d script will set the rejection
level.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
William Holman wrote:
I've been over-ruled by those who pay the bills, so I can't use
SpamAssassin since it's open source
How do I unsubscribe from the lists?
Thank-you!
I have an anti-spam product I, ah, we, ah, my COMPANY, (yeah, that's the
ticket) call Snowjack Scanner which is at least
snowjack wrote:
I have an anti-spam product I, ah, we, ah, my COMPANY, (yeah, that's the
ticket) call Snowjack Scanner which is at least as effective as any
other... commercial solution. It has a Bayes filter, score averaging by
sender, whitelisting capabilities, many effective individual rules
Kang, Joseph S. wrote:
As for the dump output..
0.000 0108 1103190407 N:H*i:sk:NNfNNNc
[snipped for brevity]
The fourth is the token itself. SA uses some prefix characters for
encoding things, but without any prefix, a token is a word in
the body of
the message.
I think you
it into the ham folder. A nightly script cleans out those IMAP
folders, runs sa-learn on the messages, and copies them into ham/spam
folders on the server, so I can use those if I need a corpus of manually
verified messages.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
Richard Harding wrote:
I am looking at getting messages together to train spamassassin and told
users to forward me messages that are spam that still get through. Is
this an ok method of collecting or will the fact that so many are
forwarded messages throw off the training?
In short, yes, it
SPAMCOP_URI_RBL2.4
score WS_URI_RBL 2.0
score PH_URI_RBL 2.4
score OB_URI_RBL 2.0
score AB_URI_RBL 2.4
score JP_URI_RBL 2.4
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 15:23:08 -0500, Kris Deugau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
SNIP
Snag mine from http://www.deepnet.cx/~kdeugau/spamtools/
Nice meta rules (BAYES_vs_SURBL) -- I like those a lot!!!
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
advantage, but when a false positive could cost you $thousands, the
bandwidth is a lot less important than the accuracy.
So, it's not useless.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
it.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
is almost certainly not
the real sender in any case
Reject: Your MTA does not accept the message, sending a 5XX to the
sending MTA, and generates no DSN.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
0.1
score BAYES_44 0.7
score BAYES_50 1.0
score BAYES_56 1.5
score BAYES_60 2.1
score BAYES_70 3.1
score BAYES_80 4.2
score BAYES_90 4.9
score BAYES_99 5.4
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
and then bouncing when it is refused.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
not
a big issue for us. We average about 25,000 messages per day from the
Internet with ~400 users. SpamAssassin is running on a dedicated Athlon
1.5 GHz machine with about 750MB of RAM, and we haven't had any
problems. Peak RAM usage is about 600MB.
--
snowjack(a)fastmail.fm
How completely rude. What are you, twelve years old?
jdow wrote:
It seems anabolic steroids are flat out missed by antidrug.cf. Of course,
I observe the idiot Apache spam trap on the spamassassin list does catch
the message sample when I attach it. Somebody needs to apply a clue bat
to the Apache
Nate Schindler wrote:
Just a curiosity question for now - is auto-expiring the AWL a planned
feature?
My auto-whitelist is about 3x the size of bayes_toks. I imagine it'll
become problematic eventually, since it's only growing.
...or is there already some way to expire old entries from the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am running Postfix 2.1 with a content_filter (latest amavisd-new) which sends
all mail through SA 2.64. I understand *some* variables that are defined
explicitly in amavisd-new are special, and thus have no effect when defined
(differently) in local.cf. AFAIK, scores
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting snowjack [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
...Did you restart amavisd-new after making the change?
Yes. :-)
Is there any evidence that local.cf is getting read at all?
On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 10:29:38 -0700, Justin Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Please note that pretty much *all* our documentation notes that this is
the case. You should NOT scan very large messages.
We configure our spamd client to only pass spamd up to the first 50KB of
a message. Definitely
Loren Wilton wrote:
80M doesn't strike me as unusual for spamd if you have any of the addon
rulesets.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]@#sputter...! Yes, that is too unusual unless you're using
ALL the addon rulesets, including BigEvil, which, I hear, eats pets and
small children when nobody's looking, and
Kelson wrote:
How about ROSS: Real Open Source Software?
Bitchin' Open Source Software: BOSS
:-)
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:57:28 -0500, Bob Apthorpe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hi,
Hello.
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:10:30 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:52:41 -0400 (EDT), Dan Mahoney, System Admin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hey guys, as a quick survey, if you're blocking
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:46:17 -0700, Erik Wickstrom
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hi all,
2 problems.
First, when I train SA on ham or spam, it seems to forget the
counterpart.
Example:
sa-learn --mbox --showdots --ham inbox
Would add say 300 hams to the Bayes DB, but turns the spam count
Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote:
Myth 4: PERL is designed for language processing, so
SpamAssassin is written in a more appropriate language.
Let me preface this with the fact that I've had about 10
years of experience coding PERL. While PERL is very useful
for
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Yup, I understand how the whole AWL works but my problem is that border
line spam is being dropped to ham. Example: A normal markup of 5.6 and
an AWL score of -0.8 drops it below the average user required_hits of 5
and does not get marked as spam.
Right, but it's an
David Brodbeck wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:26:12 -0700, snowjack wrote
Yeah, and it is true that SpamAssassin uses lots of RAM (20M per
process?) So what, RAM is cheap!
If I'm not mistaken, some of that 20M is actually shared amongst all the
spamd
processes, so it's not as much memory usage
jdow wrote:
My understanding is that Earthlink servers are open so that people
who are mobile can still send mail through their Earthlink accounts.
The way they handle the spam issue is a tarpit operation. The more
mails you send in a given interval the slower the mail processes. So
Earthlink
On 16 Sep 2004 13:39:30 -0700, Daniel Quinlan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Bart Schaefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Feeding the Bayes rules through the scoring algorithm seems to imply a
lack of trust in the accuracy of the classifier.
Mostly not. It's needed to map from the 0 to 1.0
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:14:17 -0700, Bret Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Maybe it wouldn't make *your* life easier. But because it's visual, it
allows me to more easily discern relevance when I put more than one list
together in a mailbox. A certain subject in one list would be more
relevant to
34 matches
Mail list logo
