Hi Dianne,
Good to hear from you.
I need the dkim/spf lookup features of SpamAssassin. procmail will
filter and dump into folders but AFAIK does not do any kind of spf or
dkim verification. There are stand-along scrips that can do that but
using those are above my pay grade unless someone
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 16:01:13 -0500
Chip wrote:
> I'm tied to a Cpanel/WHM VPS which can't be changed.
That's a problem. It's like having someone require you to play
Hungarian Rhapsody while wearing mittens. I mean sure... maybe it's
possible, but why would you try?
Is
yes, everything you say is accurate and correct.
We are not looking for perfection in the gathering of statistics, only
ballpark.
No one will ever open the bogus, phishing emails because the emails are
not attached to a living person. Once the statistic is collected the
email is automatically
On 01/19/2018 08:30 AM, Chip wrote:
Good question.
Saying why I care about spf and dkim but not spam sounds contradictory,
I know.
The reason is because this project doesn't care if spam arrives, only if
the spam or email (even authenticated properly email) is spoofed.
How are you going to
Thank you! I see that shortcircuit is already enabled in 320!
I think you really hit on something.
Thanks again!
I knew there was a simple answer.
On 01/19/2018 09:35 AM, David Jones wrote:
> On 01/19/2018 08:24 AM, Chip wrote:
>> Ok point take - I should have mentioned earlier that *part* of
On 01/19/2018 08:24 AM, Chip wrote:
Ok point take - I should have mentioned earlier that *part* of the
reason to stick with SA is because it does spf and dkim checks. My mistake.
Moving on now, David, good suggestions! Enlighten me about the
Shortcirtcuit plugin please. How does one
Good question.
Saying why I care about spf and dkim but not spam sounds contradictory,
I know.
The reason is because this project doesn't care if spam arrives, only if
the spam or email (even authenticated properly email) is spoofed.
We are doing checks on senders and the likelihood of a
Ok point take - I should have mentioned earlier that *part* of the
reason to stick with SA is because it does spf and dkim checks. My mistake.
Moving on now, David, good suggestions! Enlighten me about the
Shortcirtcuit plugin please. How does one activate it or use it?
The manual gives an
On 01/19/2018 08:07 AM, RW wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 18:49:52 -0500
Chip wrote:
Very well stated. Bravo!
The end point here is to examine the email headers that specifically
refer to dkim and spf signatures. Based on fail or pass, or some
combination in concert with the sender's email
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 18:49:52 -0500
Chip wrote:
> Very well stated. Bravo!
>
> The end point here is to examine the email headers that specifically
> refer to dkim and spf signatures. Based on fail or pass, or some
> combination in concert with the sender's email address, they get moved
> into
On 01/18/2018 05:49 PM, Chip wrote:
Very well stated. Bravo!
The end point here is to examine the email headers that specifically
refer to dkim and spf signatures. Based on fail or pass, or some
combination in concert with the sender's email address, they get moved
into fail or pass folders.
Chip schrieb am 19.01.2018 um 00:49:
The end point here is to examine the email headers that specifically
refer to dkim and spf signatures. Based on fail or pass, or some
combination in concert with the sender's email address, they get moved
into fail or pass folders.
The right thing to do
Exactly!
That is why I want to stick with SA because it does know how to do spf
and dkim checks whereas other systems don't unless we install software
to do that.
On 01/18/2018 07:31 PM, Alan Hodgson wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-01-18 at 18:49 -0500, Chip wrote:
>> Very well stated. Bravo!
>>
>> The
On Thu, 2018-01-18 at 18:49 -0500, Chip wrote:
> Very well stated. Bravo!
>
> The end point here is to examine the email headers that specifically
> refer to dkim and spf signatures. Based on fail or pass, or some
> combination in concert with the sender's email address, they get moved
> into
Very well stated. Bravo!
The end point here is to examine the email headers that specifically
refer to dkim and spf signatures. Based on fail or pass, or some
combination in concert with the sender's email address, they get moved
into fail or pass folders.
That's it!
I know there are other
Chip schrieb am 18.01.2018 um 23:43:
yes I'm starting to see that. I may need to build a box specifically
suited for this using procmail. I had hoped that I could stay with the VPS.
Nevertheless, I've heard two contradictory pieces of advise here and
would like to know which is correct or
Thanks for pointing out Sieve. I'll look into that.
It's nice in that it acts on the last procedure - or right before
delivery to the mail folder after all the other dirty work has been done.
thanks.
On 01/18/2018 05:55 PM, Larry Rosenman wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:43:04PM -0500, Chip
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:43:04PM -0500, Chip wrote:
> yes I'm starting to see that. I may need to build a box specifically
> suited for this using procmail. I had hoped that I could stay with the VPS.
>
I'd look at using sieve instead. Procmail has had some issues and not well
maintained.
yes I'm starting to see that. I may need to build a box specifically
suited for this using procmail. I had hoped that I could stay with the VPS.
Nevertheless, I've heard two contradictory pieces of advise here and
would like to know which is correct or most-near correct.
I'm sure there are
On 1/18/2018 2:09 PM, Chip wrote:
> Newbie excited to use the features of SpamAssassin for a new project
> that needs to flag inbound email for sorting into folders (this can be
> done via cpanel-level filtering) based on keywords in headers (header
> search by SA).
>
> This is a Centos 6.9
Yes I read the basic configuration.
Did you read my initial request in which I said I was a newbie?
Reading the "basic configuration" has no bearing on the other parts of
my inquiry. Perhaps you didn't read that as well?
Where I said this was a VPS with several domains? And that there where
Thank you, Sir.
So in my local.cf there is a commented-out rule as follows:
# Set the threshold at which a message is considered spam (default: 5.0)
#
# required_score 5.0
setting that required to 999 will over ride the standard rules system wide?
On 01/18/2018 05:11 PM, David Jones wrote:
>
How better to figure other than asking here?
Ummm. Isn't that what this mailing list is about?
People helping others?
I guess I'm at the wrong place.
I'm not asking someone to do my work for me.
I'm asking for some advise from people who know more than me without
them getting sarcastic or
On 01/18/2018 04:00 PM, Chip wrote:
Find this tidbit of information how to find the rules that are loaded
with spam assassin:
spamassassin --lint -D 2>&1 | grep 'config: read file'
I see many, many lines of files.
I don't see myself going into all those files and replacing a score of
whatever
Find this tidbit of information how to find the rules that are loaded
with spam assassin:
spamassassin --lint -D 2>&1 | grep 'config: read file'
I see many, many lines of files.
I don't see myself going into all those files and replacing a score of
whatever with a 999 or 0.
There must be a
Looking in my setup I see local.cf attached to many virtfs as in:
/home/virtfs/domain-name/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
as well as in:
/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
When I open these files there are very little rules so can't really see
what I must change here?
This is a VPS with about 10
On 01/18/2018 03:01 PM, Chip wrote:
Thank you Shanew for the suggestion.
I'm tied to a Cpanel/WHM VPS which can't be changed. Give that there
are some restrictions such as the use of Exim. Exim apparently does not
play nice with mimedefang and only partially nice with procmail - at
least as
Thank you Shanew for the suggestion.
I'm tied to a Cpanel/WHM VPS which can't be changed. Give that there
are some restrictions such as the use of Exim. Exim apparently does not
play nice with mimedefang and only partially nice with procmail - at
least as I've tested it. I would actually
I can't help but think that you'd be better of using something like
procmail, maildrop (part of Courier), or sieve if want you want is
sorting without all the overhead of checking for spam.
But maybe I'm not understanding what you want to accomplish...
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Chip wrote:
Newbie
On 01/18/2018 02:33 PM, Chip wrote:
That sounds doable. If I score everything 0 or 999 will things be
overwritten in local.cf on update or elsewhere?
The local.cf is yours to update and does not get touched by upgrades or
ruleset updates.
What you are suggesting sounds like a reasonable
That sounds doable. If I score everything 0 or 999 will things be
overwritten in local.cf on update or elsewhere?
What you are suggesting sounds like a reasonable course of action.
On 01/18/2018 03:29 PM, David Jones wrote:
> On 01/18/2018 02:09 PM, Chip wrote:
>> Newbie excited to use the
On 01/18/2018 02:09 PM, Chip wrote:
Newbie excited to use the features of SpamAssassin for a new project
that needs to flag inbound email for sorting into folders (this can be
done via cpanel-level filtering) based on keywords in headers (header
search by SA).
This is a Centos 6.9 machine
Newbie excited to use the features of SpamAssassin for a new project
that needs to flag inbound email for sorting into folders (this can be
done via cpanel-level filtering) based on keywords in headers (header
search by SA).
This is a Centos 6.9 machine running cpanel/WHM 11.68.0.23 and
33 matches
Mail list logo