Re: spamassassin defaults

2011-02-14 Thread RW 
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 08:21:06 +0200
Tom Kinghorn thomas.kingh...@gmail.com wrote:

   Good morning.
 
 Could someone advise where I can find the spamassassin defaults,
 Specifically, I am looking for the defaults for
 
 --min-children=num
 --min-spare=num
 --max-spare=num
 --max-conn-per-child=num
 
 
They are given in the man page for spamd or perldoc spamd

Re: spamassassin defaults

2011-02-14 Thread Jared Hall 
v3.3.1:

Tom Kinghorn wrote:
  Good morning.

 Could someone advise where I can find the spamassassin defaults,
 Specifically, I am looking for the defaults for

 --min-children=num
1
 --min-spare=num
1
 --max-spare=num
2
 --max-conn-per-child=num

200

 Thanks


 Tom

Re: channel 70_zmi_german.cf.zmi.sa-update.dostech.net update?

2011-02-14 Thread Bowie Bailey 
On 2/11/2011 8:49 PM, Adam Katz wrote:
 On 02/11/2011 06:53 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
 The khop rules should probably be added to that list.
 The only official site I could find referencing these rules is 
 http://khopesh.com/wiki/Anti-spam (under the sa-update channels 
 heading), but this also has some out of date information regarding
 the SARE rules.
 The 2tld stuff, yeah.  I need to note that that's not useful in
 sa3.3.0+.  I'm pretty sure everything is otherwise up to date.

Actually, I was mainly referring to the list of SARE rules.  I guess I
didn't notice the warning about them being unsupported and not useful in
SA 3.2 or higher when I scanned through the page on Friday.

Sonevermind...The page looks fine!  :)

-- 
Bowie

Re: alert: New event: ET EXPLOIT Possible SpamAssassin Milter Plugin Remote Arbitrary Command Injection Attempt

2011-02-14 Thread Adam Katz 
On 02/12/2011 05:19 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
 On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 12:08:35 -0800, Adam Katz wrote:
 
 I consider it a mission-critical component to be able to deliver a
 rejection notice at SMTP-time (to avoid backscatter from an emailed
 bounce message).  The other systems out there (specifically amavis and
 mailscanner) just can't do this while spamass-milter does it with very
 little overhead or configuration.
 
 For posterity, and to hopefully prevent the spread of misinformation via
 list archives, the above (specifically with regard to amavisd-new) is
 patently false.

Thanks for the correction to Mark, Henrik, and Sahil.  I did not know
that.  I also did not know about amavisd-milter.  These either weren't
around a few years ago or they were not found when I researched this
(including questions to irc.freenode.com#amavisd or whatever that
channel is named).

My apologies, I was not trying to propagate misinformation.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Irony

2011-02-14 Thread Philip Prindeville 

On 2/7/11 1:28 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:

On Tue, 1 Feb 2011 09:49:36 -0500
Michael Scheidellmichael.scheid...@secnap.com  wrote:


because HELO doesn't match RDNS.

On 01.02.11 09:54, David F. Skoll wrote:

Rejecting on that basis would also cause tons of false-positives.

It's also violation of all SMTP RFCs (former and current), because they
explicitly say that the sender MUST NOT reject smtp session just because
HELO string does not match resolved FQDN.



Does anyone else reject messages where the rDNS maps to more than one PTR 
record?