Jake Maul wrote:
Interesting that I'm just now running into this... I've been using
Botnet on this server for several months without issue.
Thanks for the link, shorter timeouts should cure it. :)
Even though Mark Martinec had provided John Rudd with a nice, neat patch
for botnet.pm well
John Rudd wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 21:11, Bill Landryb...@inetmsg.com wrote:
Jake Maul wrote:
Interesting that I'm just now running into this... I've been using
Botnet on this server for several months without issue.
Thanks for the link, shorter timeouts should cure it. :)
Even though
McDonald, Dan wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 21:40 -0700, John Rudd wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 21:11, Bill Landryb...@inetmsg.com wrote:
Jake Maul wrote:
Interesting that I'm just now running into this... I've been using
Botnet on this server for several months without issue.
Thanks for
I've had no trouble with Botnet timeouts, but just now patched anyway,
to avoid any potential trouble. I, and many others appreciate how
responsive you've been with your sanesecurity work, but not everyone has
the same resources.
Whenever I install GNU free software, I have to remember this.
Well I suppose you could always take the product that you dislike so
badly back to the store and ask for a refund of your purchase price.
Sometimes it really amazes me how much, and how severely, some people
will gripe about free products that exist only because other people
volunteer their
This issue has been unresolved for way too long. All of this, in my
mind, this makes the plugin orphaned and unusable if not patched with
Mark's patch.
Actually it's a patch by Daniel J McDonald from 2007-06-15.
I just refreshed it for 0.8 and reposted it two months later.
Credits where
I just love these kinds of responses (talk about 5yo tantrums), as they
only server to prove my point about your credibility and the value of
your opinions. Thank you! :-)
Bill
Res wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Bill Landry wrote:
I'm sure John might be happier to stay awake later and work
Res wrote:
No because I seem to have reliable DNS and have never exhibited the issue.
Oh, and if in fact you really had a clue, you would know that DNS
reliability has absolutely nothing to do with this issue... ;-)
Bill
John Rudd wrote:
Further, Bill, I don't answer to you for my time constraints. Now
quit your whining and put your money where your mouth is. If it's so
important, then provide a fix that replaces Net::DNS with SA's
internal DNS routines, and I'll use it. If it's not important enough
to
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Sat, June 13, 2009 14:31, Bill Landry wrote:
However, if
you are willing to release something to the open source community, you
should also be willing to take on the responsibility of providing
ongoing support for it.
who says that ?, i have maybe missunderstod gpl
Res wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Bill Landry wrote:
I just love these kinds of responses (talk about 5yo tantrums), as they
only server to prove my point about your credibility and the value of
your opinions. Thank you! :-)
truth hurts dont it landry, just like i tell those who demand
Res wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Charles Gregory wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Res wrote:
Though now its Sunday, I have socialising to do, and none of that
includes sitting on mailing lists listening to cry babies who expect
people involved in OSSP's to drop everything and be their servants.
David Gibbs wrote:
mouss wrote:
- mail admin at example.com configures his mail system to sign all
outbound mail with DKIM
- he rejects any mail with a From: in his domain if it doesn't have a
valid DKIM signature
- j...@example.com posts to a list that appends a footer (or munges the
David Gibbs wrote:
Bill Landry wrote:
This may be true if the sender were adding the footer before signing and
sending the message to the list. However, not true if it's the mailing
list that is adding the footer after the original sender has already
signed the message.
As I understand
Chris Owen wrote:
On Jun 14, 2009, at 8:10 PM, Bill Landry wrote:
Mailman has specific functionality to remove signature headers so
that the message can be resigned as it's sent out.
If that happens then the message is no longer signed by the original
sender, but rather by the mailing
ram wrote:
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 15:35 +1000, Con Tassios wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Chip M. wrote:
DOB (Day Old Bread) had the same problem last year:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200810.mbox/%3cva.33f1.14690...@news.conactive.com%3e
With software bugs,
Bill Landry a écrit :
Res wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Charles Gregory wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Res wrote:
Though now its Sunday, I have socialising to do, and none of that
includes sitting on mailing lists listening to cry babies who expect
people involved in OSSP's to drop everything
mouss wrote:
Mailman has specific functionality to remove signature headers so
that the message can be resigned as it's sent out.
which doesn't help, because if I get mail claiming to come From:
mo...@netoyen.net, yet it doesn't have a sig of mine, I don't
really care if some fancy mailman
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
Are you experiencing the same?
Some of them are even sleeping through FuzzyOcr. Any tuning to suggest?
Yes, shake them as they are passing through FuzzyOcr, that should wake
them up so that FuzzyOcr can detect them as they pass through... ;-)
Bill
Clunk Werclick wrote:
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 08:05 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
On 14-Sep-2009, at 05:24, --[ UxBoD ]-- wrote:
If the OP cannot refrain from that sort of foul language when
presented with counter arguments then please ban. The list would be
far happier IMHO.
Based on his reply
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Warren Togami wrote:
One thing they all have in common is their registration dates are very
young according to whois lookups. It seems in general if we had a
reliable way to lookup domain age we might be able to differentiate
spam.
What's the current status of the Day
--[ UxBoD ]-- wrote:
- Clunk Werclick mailbacku...@googlemail.com wrote:
| On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 19:52 +0100, --[ UxBoD ]-- wrote:
| - Benny Pedersen m...@junc.org wrote:
|
| | On man 14 sep 2009 16:54:39 CEST, Bill Landry wrote
| | So how far does someone have to go before
Clunk Werclick wrote:
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 20:38 +0100, --[ UxBoD ]-- wrote:
- Clunk Werclick mailbacku...@googlemail.com wrote:
| On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 19:52 +0100, --[ UxBoD ]-- wrote:
| - Benny Pedersen m...@junc.org wrote:
|
| | On man 14 sep 2009 16:54:39 CEST, Bill Landry
On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 18:34 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
I had considered this, but another poster made the worthy point that
the (ab)user in question was likely the sort to get another fake address
just so they could keep posting their crud. Sometimes 'ignore them' is
the
simplest and best
On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 18:34 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
I had considered this, but another poster made the worthy point that
the (ab)user in question was likely the sort to get another fake
address
just so they could keep posting their crud. Sometimes 'ignore them' is
the
simplest and
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 16:36 -0700, Bill Landry wrote:
Yes, the buzzard has also displayed the same abusive nature under his
other email address many times in the past. He uses the same email client
(X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.3), the same reference in his Message-Id
John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Igor Bogomazov wrote:
whitelist_from_rcvd s...@domain.mail prefix.domain.mail
doesn't work.
I've checked rDNS of the prefix.domain.mail with 'host' utility - it's
all right.
You don't check rDNS using host, you check it using dig -x
Just FYI, in case you might be using the Karmasphere plug-in with
Spamassassin.
Bill
Original Message
Subject: ** IMPORTANT: Karmasphere Reputation Service End of Life ***
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:31:55 + (GMT)
From: D J Stewart d...@karmasphere.com
To:
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Benny Pedersen m...@junc.org:
On tir 10 nov 2009 15:26:43 CET, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote
Please keep this in your mind in future before trotting out that tired
old gas.
imho Ralf have never being banned in maillist here, if you dont like
his answers just
Christian Brel, AKA rich...@buzzhost.co.uk (among other aliases), is
back...
Bill
LuKreme wrote:
On 9-Jan-2010, at 21:23, Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
It's the number of seconds since the epoch (Jan 1, 1970). One easy way to
convert it to a readable time is
# perl -e 'print scalar localtime 1263044805, \n'
Sat Jan 9 08:46:45 2010
Or even simpler:
perl -le 'print
Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Bill Landry [mailto:b...@inetmsg.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 12:42 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: About upgrading
LuKreme wrote:
On 9-Jan-2010, at 21:23, Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
It's the number
Mark Martinec wrote:
On Thursday 28 January 2010 14:40:56 Graham Murray wrote:
Since upgrading to SA 3.3.0, botnet (version 0.8) is showing a false
positive on every email I receive via IPv6.
Has anyone contacted the author?
As most here on the list know: Good luck with that. From what
Saw this posted on another list:
http://sunbeltblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/botmaster-busted.html
United States Attorney McGregor W. Scott announced today the arrest of GREG
KING, 21, of Fairfield, California, and...
Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Rob McEwen wrote:
Therefore, I recommend that you re-think your choices here! Don't let
your quest for guaranteed long-term perfection keep you from making
**substantial** progress today!
Rob,
Then help rally the SA team to include
Kris Deugau wrote:
Mikael Syska wrote:
I'm not sure about all the diff black list options ... but I guess it
would be rather easy to test it .
header RCVD_IN_LASHBACK eval:check_rbl('LASHBACK','ubl.unsubscore.com')
describe RCVD_IN_LASHBACK lashback
tflags RCVD_IN_LASHBACK net
score
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote the following on 10/18/2007 11:01 PM -0800:
Check your $HOME for an ever growing ~/razor-agent.log apparently
brought in by sa-update two days ago, which will one day fill your
disk, according to a web search.
How to tell it that just like the other 99% of
Igor Chudov wrote the following on 10/20/2007 9:27 PM -0800:
I was looking at this article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-mail_spam
It claims that only five countries are hosting 99.68% of the global
spammer websites, of which the foremost is China, hosting 73.58% of
all web sites
JP Kelly wrote the following on 10/21/2007 11:41 AM -0800:
this looks interesting to me as well
i am a little confused about how to use/install it
on the page you provided a link to it says under USAGE to add the
following to your local.cf file
loadplugin
Nigel Frankcom wrote the following on 10/21/2007 11:22 PM -0800:
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 23:27:41 -0500, Igor Chudov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I was looking at this article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-mail_spam
It claims that only five countries are hosting 99.68% of the global
spammer
Steven Stern wrote:
I'm getting the following error from various perl programs:
$sa-update
Use of uninitialized value in concatenation (.) or string at
/usr/lib64/perl5/5.8.8/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/Scalar/Util.pm line 30.
OK... maybe we need an update:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# perl -MCPAN
- Original Message -
From: Steven W. Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday, Jun 19th 2006 at 11:40 -0400, quoth Chris Santerre:
=
=
= -Original Message-
= From: Steven W. Orr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
= Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 9:08 AM
= To: spamassassin-users
= Subject: Can SA
- Original Message -
From: Dirk Bonengel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi list,
just as the subject says: I added some stuff to
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/iXhash and
- made it clear (I hope) what it actually does
- added installation instructions
- added a version that runs under
- Original Message -
From: Thomas Lindell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I only recently got spamassassin up and running and am hardly an expert but
can anyone explain to me exactly what spf is?
See http://www.openspf.org/ for detailed information on SPF.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Jim Maul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
John D. Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Ramprasad wrote:
How about sending 450 Please Try later to ever mail with an
inline image and then somehow verify if it really comes back.
(Obviously not my original idea :-) )
The
- Original Message -
From: Spamassassin List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 2:26 PM
Subject: Re: Improved OCR Plugin with approximate matching
Spamassassin List wrote:
decoder wrote:
See
- Original Message -
From: Andy Jezierski
There's a bunch of people in SARE (I don't know the actual number)
focused on developing rules.
Agreed. That's all they do is rules. Who knows how many ninja's are out
there.
Well, from what I recall, from when my kids were much
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Here's how you might use the lists if you have Exim:
|
| # Mark it White
| warn dnslists = hostkarma.junkemailfilter.com=127.0.0.1
| set acl_c1 = white - dnswl - $sender_fullhost
| # Mark it Yellow
| warn dnslists =
- Original Message -
From: Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark,
Since I don't use Exim, do you know how I can implement this to call
from SA?
Something like this would work:
header __RCVD_IN_JMFILTER eval:check_rbl('JMFILTER',
'hostkarma.junkemailfilter.com.')
describe
- Original Message -
From: Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Here's how you might use the lists if you have Exim:
| | # Mark it White | warn dnslists =
hostkarma.junkemailfilter.com=127.0.0.1
| set acl_c1 = white - dnswl - $sender_fullhost
| # Mark it Yellow | warn
Title: Scalix message content
Why would you hijack someone else's thread?
If you are not going to at least response to the original question, then at
least have the courtesy to start your own new message thread.
Bill
- Original Message -
From:
Nathan
Brink
To: users
Just came across one of these in a spam message:
bang Locals @ www.nowdatenow. com oopsy no space before com
Oh what will they try next...?
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Steve [Spamassasin] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jorge Valdes wrote:
There are multiple images in these gifs, and because the first image
is 'junk', sending this image through gocr will yield no results. The
problem is that you have to scan all images to find the text.
On 2/27/2010 5:35 PM, João Gouveia wrote:
Hi all,
we are aiming to provide free usage of our DNSBL to the general anti spam
community as soon as possible.
However, in order to do this we would need to deploy more DNS mirrors or we
risk providing a poor service due to the amount of DNS traffic
On 2/27/2010 6:42 PM, João Gouveia wrote:
Hi Bill,
- Bill Landryb...@inetmsg.com wrote:
On 2/27/2010 5:35 PM, João Gouveia wrote:
Hi all,
we are aiming to provide free usage of our DNSBL to the general anti
spam community as soon as possible.
However, in order
On 2/28/2010 11:35 AM, Carlos Williams wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Benny Pedersenm...@junc.org wrote:
I do the following but from my MTA. I don't know if you're using
Postfix or Sendmail but I have the following 'helo_checks.pcre' in my
Postfix directory:
/^localhost$/
On 3/3/2010 1:40 PM, Mike Cardwell wrote:
On 03/03/2010 21:32, Michael Scheidell wrote:
tracking down some FP's on Sa 3.3.0, they all hit URIBL_DBL.
(every email hits that rule)
# DBL, http://www.spamhaus.org/dbl/ . Note that hits return 127.0.1.x
# A records, so we use a 32-bit mask to
On Wed, March 3, 2010 5:38 am, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
On 3.3.2010 15:34, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
On 3.3.2010 15:22, twofers wrote:
I have 52 of these sitting in my inbox this morning when I came in to
work. this is just the beginning. I get literally hundreds of these a
day and Spamassassin
On Wed, March 3, 2010 5:20 pm, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 16:06 -0800, Bill Landry wrote:
On Wed, March 3, 2010 5:38 am, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
We're not going to re-hash one of the many discussions, err, heated
flame-fests from the clamav and sanesecurity lists, are we
On Mon, March 22, 2010 9:01 am, Bill Landry wrote:
On 3/22/2010 4:31 AM, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Warren Togami wrote on Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:13:10 -0400:
I highly recommend NOT building the RPM package from the spec file
contained
within the spamassassin tarball. It has never been tested to work
On Mon, March 22, 2010 10:31 am, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Bill Landry wrote on Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:01:26 -0700:
I tried it with Fedora 12
I didn't say anything about Fedora.
But Warren certainly did in his original post. And BTW, he didn't say
anything about CentOS is his original post
On Thu, May 20, 2010 4:26 pm, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On fre 21 maj 2010 00:05:26 CEST, Michael Scheidell wrote
On 5/20/10 6:00 PM, Robert Palmer wrote:
I am running spamassassin version 3.2.4 and notice my rules have
not updated (sa-update) for many months and I have started getting
a lot of
On 11/5/2010 11:40 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
All,
Has anyone come up with a ruleset yet to score against the new spamhaus
whitelists, and deduct points appropriately?
You could try something like:
header SPAMHAUS_SWL eval:check_rbl('SPAMHAUS_SWL', 'swl.spamhaus.org.')
describe
On 11/6/2010 12:19 AM, Bill Landry wrote:
On 11/5/2010 11:40 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
All,
Has anyone come up with a ruleset yet to score against the new spamhaus
whitelists, and deduct points appropriately?
You could try something like:
header SPAMHAUS_SWL eval:check_rbl
On 11/6/2010 12:50 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 00:41:53 -0700
Bill Landryb...@inetmsg.com wrote:
You could also test the envelope sender:
header SPAMHAUS_ENV eval:check_rbl_envfrom('SPAMHAUS_ENV',
'_vouch.dwl.spamhaus.org.')
But that's an abuse... you should not
On 1/5/2011 5:11 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
Combining p0f with BOTNET is indended to *reduce* the high number
of false positives that BOTNET alone produces, *at least* for the
non-windows machines. The windows hosts are left alone and are
not protected by p0f from BOTNET FP.
If someone is scoring
FYI: Spamhaus created a new URL shortener/redirector zone in the
DBL. See:
http://www.spamhaus.org/news.lasso?article=667
Will Spamassassin be adding support for this new DBL
shortener/redirector response code?:
127.0.1.3 spammed redirector domain
For details, see:
No wonder I have seen such a huge drop in spam the past few days:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/enterprise-it/security/Microsoft-brings-down-major-fake-drug-spam-network/articleshow/7734903.cms
Anyone else been noticing the decrease in spam?
Bill
On 3/18/2011 5:08 PM, Michelle Konzack wrote:
Hello Bill Landry,
Am 2011-03-18 15:11:47, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
No wonder I have seen such a huge drop in spam the past few days:
??? I get 18-26 mio spams (36 servers with 96.000 users) per day and
nothing has changed. Please
On 8/9/2011 8:28 AM, Dave Wreski wrote:
Hi,
I noticed that the site that provided the malware.blocklist.cf has
been unavailable since at least the 8th of August.
URL for the file was on
http://www.malware.com.br/cgi/submit?action=list_sa
The FQDN no longer resolves to an address. I have
Marc Perkel wrote the following on 11/18/2006 8:24 AM -0800:
decoder wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
The words file needs a little documentation. Is it limited to single
words or phrases too? What's with the colon and the numbers after
the word?
Phrases are possible too, spaces and numbers are
John Rudd wrote the following on 11/30/2006 9:26 AM -0800:
Jonas Eckerman wrote:
John Rudd wrote:
Question 2: someone asked why my module is Botnet instead of
Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Botnet. The answer is: when I first
started this (and this is/was my first SA Plugin authoring attempt),
Kelly Jones wrote the following on 12/6/2006 8:13 PM -0800:
Spamassassin has lots of tests for fake HELOs. If someone says HELO
hotmail.com, but aren't connecting from a Hotmail IP address, they
get dinged (spam score is increased).
Recently, someone connected our server, call it mx.xyz.com,
LuKreme wrote the following on 2/15/2007 4:18 PM -0800:
I have a LOT of spam that is hitting with score in the teens despite
getting very low AWL scores.
In fact, of the 400 messages in my current SPAM folder, 77 have
negative AWL, some as high as -7.9 (38 have positive AWL scores)
for
Marc Perkel wrote the following on 3/24/2007 1:25 PM -0800:
What's the easiest way to do an sa-learn on a bunch of messages stored
in maildir format. Should I pipe them into salearn or use spamc?
sa-learn --progress --spam /path/to/maildir/.Spam/cur/*
Will do what you want.
Bill
Jean-Paul Natola wrote the following on 3/27/2007 7:36 AM -0800:
Hi everyone,
I have a contact from Africa whom I put on the whitelist because everytime he
would send mail the scores went through the roof-
Recently he started getting this:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host
Dave Pooser wrote the following on 4/3/2007 11:19 AM -0800:
I'm seeing a bunch of spam using URLs from domains created on the same day
or in the past day or two. I don't know how red.uribl.com works, but I
imagine it missed the same-day stuff because its automated process needs
time to work. Is
ram wrote the following on 4/4/2007 12:56 AM -0800:
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 13:15 -0700, Bill Landry wrote:
Dave Pooser wrote the following on 4/3/2007 11:19 AM -0800:
I'm seeing a bunch of spam using URLs from domains created on the same day
or in the past day or two. I don't know how
ram wrote the following on 4/5/2007 10:23 PM -0800:
On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 08:11 -0700, Bill Landry wrote:
ram wrote the following on 4/4/2007 12:56 AM -0800:
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 13:15 -0700, Bill Landry wrote:
Dave Pooser wrote the following on 4/3/2007 11:19 AM -0800
J. wrote the following on 4/8/2007 11:14 AM -0800:
Not sure if this is connected to my agressive smtp connection rejection
campaign over the past week, but we've been hit for the first time in
many months with a backscatter spam attack. Spammer(s) use random
addresses with our domain for their
J. wrote the following on 4/8/2007 4:11 PM -0800:
--- Bill Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, have you taken a look at the SA vbounce ruleset? See:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/VBounceRuleset
One issue is that I have fast_spamassassin turned on so I don't get
Peter Russell wrote the following on 4/9/2007 3:41 PM -0800:
We dont use Botnet anymore, it fires on anything/everything and drives
me nuts.
You must not have Botnet and/or your trusted_networks setup correctly then.
Bill
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote the following on 4/9/2007 4:37 PM -0800:
Bill Landry wrote:
Peter Russell wrote the following on 4/9/2007 3:41 PM -0800:
We dont use Botnet anymore, it fires on anything/everything and
drives me nuts.
You must not have Botnet and/or your trusted_networks setup
Since upgrading to SA 3.2.0 yesterday, I am noticing that the header
reporting for URIBLs has changed (I had to rename the original domain
names with 1.example.com 2.example.com names as my first message to
the list was rejected).
With SA 3.1.8:
* 2.5 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed
Marc Perkel wrote the following on 5/6/2007 9:17 AM -0800:
Been getting a few strange false positives lately. Here's something
unusual.
X-Spam-Report:
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
* -2.0 BAYES_05 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 1 to 5%
* [score: 0.0206]
* 1.4
Jerry Durand wrote the following on 5/14/2007 10:00 PM -0800:
Sorry for the posting on this list, someone mentioned that even though
the man for amavisd is essentially empty, this feature is mentioned
elsewhere. I only recently got on the amavisd-new announce list so
didn't see anything about
Big Wave Dave wrote the following on 5/15/2007 12:54 PM -0800:
On 5/15/07, Daryl C. W. O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Big Wave Dave wrote:
Do you want to see the full debug with --lint or a real message?
Should I send it to the list as well?
Thanks for your assistance.
Either would
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote the following on 5/24/2007 10:23 PM -0800:
Hi Daryl,
you are speaking in riddles???
Wolfgang
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Never mind, looking into this further there's no problem with the change
made in r447014. The issue is qmail should be adding with ESMTPA
Karamanga wrote the following on 5/28/2007 1:01 PM -0800:
Dear Daryl, ty for your reply,
I got rid of the anti-drug.cf error buh just renaming this cf file.
The error on DCC i dont understand. The plugin is installed and uncommentent
in the v310.pre file in the sa directory and i cheked the
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote the following on 6/8/2007 2:41 PM -0800:
If you've got the current update from updates.spamassassin.org you've
got a working set of rules for URIBL_BLACK and URIBL_GREY. It turns
out that they didn't hit for Raymond either, so you won't see them in
this case.
Daryl
Mark Martinec wrote the following on 6/12/2007 3:53 AM -0800:
Luis,
I don't have any URIBL rules firing up (SA 3.2.0 from source here,
most of the other relevant info is in the header of the mail I sent
before to test). Where did you get them?
[...]
But the main difference between the live
Mark Martinec wrote the following on 6/12/2007 3:05 PM -0800:
Bill,
Mark, just curious if you are running Botnet? I found that some
messages cause the Botnet RDNS test to timeout after hanging for about
30 seconds, and then network test randomly fail (primarily URIBL
tests). I found that
Mark Martinec wrote the following on 6/15/2007 3:36 AM -0800:
Phil, Bill,
Mark, I patched Dns.pm but this didn't resolve the issue for me.
You can test with the sample messages I posted to bugzilla:
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5506
I was getting this
Mark Martinec wrote the following on 6/15/2007 10:41 AM -0800:
Bill,
There is now an additional patch at:
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5511
which should fix this.
Mark, thanks for the patches. However, even with both Dns.pm patches
applied, unless I
Randal, Phil wrote the following on 6/15/2007 2:08 PM -0800:
Bill,
The problem is that Botnet uses Net::DNS::Resolver's default retry and
timeout values, which are way too high.
Spamassassin's DnsResolver.pm uses these values:
udp_timeout:3
tcp_timeout:3
retrans:0
retry:1
try
Mark Martinec wrote the following on 6/15/2007 2:34 PM -0800:
So far so good with Mark's patches - although I am awaiting his
follow-up regarding a possible bug...
Not sure I understand this. My fixes make SA more robust when
plugins misbehave. The Botnet problem still causes the mail
John Rudd wrote the following on 6/15/2007 3:00 PM -0800:
Bill Landry wrote:
Also, I'm not sure if John Rudd is still supporting Botnet or not,
since I have sent him 3 e-mails to the address listed in Botnet.pm
off-list over the past week about this, and asked him if he would
consider
Daniel J McDonald wrote the following on 6/15/2007 2:54 PM -0800:
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 22:08 +0100, Randal, Phil wrote:
Bill,
The problem is that Botnet uses Net::DNS::Resolver's default retry and
timeout values, which are way too high.
Spamassassin's DnsResolver.pm uses these values:
Daniel J McDonald wrote the following on 6/15/2007 3:37 PM -0800:
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 15:27 -0700, Bill Landry wrote:
Daniel J McDonald wrote the following on 6/15/2007 2:54 PM -0800:
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 22:08 +0100, Randal, Phil wrote:
And a few others... Might as well
John Rudd wrote the following on 6/27/2007 10:27 AM -0800:
Bret Miller wrote:
Perhaps more a clamav question, but does anyone use the additional
definitions for clam from SaneSecurity and are they helpful in the
Spam Wars?
You're in luck! I just installed them yesterday. Had been meaning to
1 - 100 of 220 matches
Mail list logo
