From: "Phil Barnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Friday 22 June 2007 12:32, jdow wrote:
Take a quick look at tripwire and its newer equivalent. They should be
about the same thing. Loading both will result in the rules that may
share
a name between the files having the newer version superseded by
On Friday 22 June 2007 12:32, jdow wrote:
> Take a quick look at tripwire and its newer equivalent. They should be
> about the same thing. Loading both will result in the rules that may share
> a name between the files having the newer version superseded by the older
> version because files load in
From: "Phil Barnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Friday 22 June 2007 00:54, jdow wrote:
I think it was mentioned around these precincts about the time tripwire
was converted to 99_FVGTTripWire.cf and added to the SARE repositories
as a SARE rule set. I also note that I don't use it here anymore. The
On Friday 22 June 2007 00:54, jdow wrote:
> I think it was mentioned around these precincts about the time tripwire
> was converted to 99_FVGTTripWire.cf and added to the SARE repositories
> as a SARE rule set. I also note that I don't use it here anymore. The
> return on CPU cycles investment was
From: "Phil Barnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Thursday 21 June 2007 08:47, jdow wrote:
Unless something has changed with the most recent versions of SpamAssassin
I see two configuraton errors present.
1) YOu do NOT use /use/share/spamassassin to store rules. They belong
in /etc/mail/spamassassin
On Thursday 21 June 2007 08:47, jdow wrote:
> Unless something has changed with the most recent versions of SpamAssassin
> I see two configuraton errors present.
>
> 1) YOu do NOT use /use/share/spamassassin to store rules. They belong
> in /etc/mail/spamassassin or some other such place.
This
> -Original Message-
> From: jdow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 7:50 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Fwd: RulesDuJour Run Summary on taz5.fiberhosting.net
>
>
> Daryl, note that a simple update to RDJ to a
Daryl, note that a simple update to RDJ to add a time gap between
individual file update attempts gets through the DDoS protection
somewhat better than a raw RDJ. A friend of mine made such a change
and has it working better.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <[EMAIL
Unless something has changed with the most recent versions of SpamAssassin
I see two configuraton errors present.
1) YOu do NOT use /use/share/spamassassin to store rules. They belong
in /etc/mail/spamassassin or some other such place.
2) Why are you running tripwire.cf (obsolete) and 99_FGTTr
Phil Barnett schrieb:
On Thursday 21 June 2007 03:38, Matthias Keller wrote:
Just try to delete the downloaded files in your rules_du_jour folder
(for example /etc/mail/spamassassin/rules_du_jour/* ), respectively just
the rule(s) that go wrong.I then redownloads the rules correctly and
you're
Phil Barnett wrote:
On Thursday 21 June 2007 03:38, Matthias Keller wrote:
Just try to delete the downloaded files in your rules_du_jour folder
(for example /etc/mail/spamassassin/rules_du_jour/* ), respectively just
the rule(s) that go wrong.I then redownloads the rules correctly and
you're
On Thursday 21 June 2007 03:38, Matthias Keller wrote:
> Just try to delete the downloaded files in your rules_du_jour folder
> (for example /etc/mail/spamassassin/rules_du_jour/* ), respectively just
> the rule(s) that go wrong.I then redownloads the rules correctly and
> you're clear to go with
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 09:38:03 +0200, Matthias Keller
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Nigel Frankcom wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 03:07:52 -0400, Phil Barnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Is anyone else getting these failed messages on their tripwire.cf updates?
>>>
>>> I've been getting
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 03:30:00 -0400, "Daryl C. W. O'Shea"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Nigel Frankcom wrote:
>
>> I've been getting the same for weeks. I ended up manually updating
>> rules; especially the stock one since more and more seem to be
>> slipping through.
>>
>> The problems seemed to st
Nigel Frankcom wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 03:07:52 -0400, Phil Barnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Is anyone else getting these failed messages on their tripwire.cf updates?
I've been getting this message for several days now.
It looks to me like the new tripwire.cf is very broken.
---
Nigel Frankcom wrote:
I've been getting the same for weeks. I ended up manually updating
rules; especially the stock one since more and more seem to be
slipping through.
The problems seemed to start after the DDoS on rulesemporium; since
then I've not been able to get any sense out of it via RD
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 03:07:52 -0400, Phil Barnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Is anyone else getting these failed messages on their tripwire.cf updates?
>
>I've been getting this message for several days now.
>
>It looks to me like the new tripwire.cf is very broken.
>
>-- Forwarded Messag
Is anyone else getting these failed messages on their tripwire.cf updates?
I've been getting this message for several days now.
It looks to me like the new tripwire.cf is very broken.
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: RulesDuJour Run Summary on taz5.fiberhosting.net
Date: Thurs
18 matches
Mail list logo