After the domain went back to normal, I continued to have a problem
with RDJ. It still reported lint errors.
The problem was that the RulesDuJour directory had become corrupted
with the temporary page that had been downloaded during the outage.
The fix was to simply delete the contents of the
David Berten wrote:
I am trying to use URIDNSBL but can not get DNS resolution
SpamAssassin 3.1.7
Output:::
Net-DNS-0.59]# spamassassin -D dns --lint
[22770] dbg: dns: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
[22770] dbg: dns: Net::DNS version: 0.59
[22770] dbg: dns: is DNS available? 0
Debbie D wrote:
Can someone please remind me how to create custom scores for existing
rules?? I do not want to manually go in and change any particular
score, any update will over ride that.. I want to manually change
them to hit on a higher [or lower as the case might be] score.
If memory
files. Because of this, the if-modified-since checks all returned
false and the real rulesets didn't clobber the broken ones.
Chris
Bowie Bailey wrote:
The fix was to simply delete the contents of the directory and try
again.
rm /etc/mail/spamassassin/RulesDuJour
Bret Miller wrote:
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
FWIW, it happens to be the official tool since no one ever
submitted RDJ to be the official tool, so we had to write our own.
I would have offered, had I known there was any interest.
Chris T.
I'm glad it isn't the official tool
R Lists06 wrote:
I am sorry if I am asking this question and it is answered in the
archives. I will try to go back and read those past posts but is
there a site where I can download the SARE stock rules and the
plugins? I am aware of Rules Du Jour but whenever I have attempted
to
Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Le mardi 16 février 2010 à 20:29 +, Martin Gregorie a écrit :
Obvious choices for (4), in order of hitting the infected user with a
successively bigger clue stick, are:
- silently discard the spam,
but you'll also throw away false positives.
Using
Igor Chudov wrote:
This is a very funny spam, takes the title of dumbest spam of Feb 2010.
http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/spam010.txt
The person who sent it, probably thinks that he is the best phister in
the world.
i
The sad thing is that some people are going to fall for this...
RW wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 08:05:10 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin jhar...@impsec.org wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, RW wrote:
Why does T_FROM_MISSPACED score 0.0, when it's score isn't defined?
Rounding. The actual defined score is 0.01, so it rounds down when
reported.
Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 2/23/10 9:03 AM, Jason Bertoch wrote:
Are there any internal checks that disable Bayes autolearn when these
artificial whitelist rules match? I'd disabled these rules in
versions prior to 3.3.0 but, with all the discussion on the matter, I
thought I'd leave them
Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 2/23/10 9:28 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 2/23/10 9:03 AM, Jason Bertoch wrote:
Are there any internal checks that disable Bayes autolearn when these
artificial whitelist rules match? I'd disabled these rules in
versions prior
Jeff Koch wrote:
In an effort to reduce spam further we tried implementing SPF
enforcement. Within three days we turned it off. What we found was that:
- domain owners are allowing SPF records to be added to their zone
files without understanding the implications or that are just not correct
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 23.02.10 16:17, Bowie Bailey wrote:
SPF enforcement at the MTA is useless for the reasons you specified.
The only exception is if you have a strict SPF policy for your own
domain, you can use it to reject spam pretending to be from your users
Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 3/1/10 10:31 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
You must create an account here to use this:
http://www.dnswl.org/registerreporter.pl
I did, thanks, using the manual reported.
you need some way to exclude the reporters ip address.
(i just reported a spam
Carlos Williams wrote:
Bill - I got my example from Ralph Hildebrandt's Postfix config
directly from his site:
http://www.arschkrebs.de/postfix/#chapter5
Respectfully it's 3 years old but he does have it the exact way I do:
/^localhost$/ 550 Don't use my own domain
Henrique Fernandes wrote:
Nops, i wnat that after i trained, the same email, should get a higher
score cause the spamassassin was trained that is a spam, so when it
comes again , it should look in the database and add some extra point
on the score right ?
That is a fairly common
(Please send replies to the list)
Henrique Fernandes wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com
mailto:bowie_bai...@buc.com wrote:
Henrique Fernandes wrote:
Nops, i wnat that after i trained, the same email, should get a
higher
score cause
Henrique Fernandes wrote:
Thanks!
I will discuss here and find out with one is better.
What are the weight of the bayser score after they well trained ? Have
any ideas about it ?
I'm not sure what you are asking. What do you mean by weight?
The default scores (as of 3.2.5) are:
BAYES_00
Right.
Henrique Fernandes wrote:
It was wht i asked, sorry i am not fluent in english
It is the score that the bayes add to the final scores right ?
[]'sf.rique
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com
mailto:bowie_bai...@buc.com wrote:
Henrique Fernandes
Carlos Mennens wrote:
I noticed someone sent me an email and there are no SA heading info in
the message. SA didn't provide a score or status on the message
headers for some weird reason. I then checked my mail logs and saw
this message:
Mar 5 08:52:18 mail spamc[2635]: skipped message,
Ron Johnson wrote:
My wife and I don't need to white-list the same people.
But if it simplifies the configuration, is there any harm in having
everything on a global whitelist? How often are you likely to receive
spam from someone your wife wanted whitelisted?
--
Bowie
Rops wrote:
How to find out if some mail server is blacklisted and where?
Is there any central database for queries from all different blacklists?
Also IP based search is required and data when and why.
I've been using this one:
http://www.mxtoolbox.com/blacklists.aspx
I'm not sure what
Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 14:56 -0500, Charles Gregory wrote:
Can anyone take a look at this crud and see a header or flag/type that I
could score in SA?
I can't see anything immediately apart from the rather wackamoleish
track of scoring the hidden URL in the
Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 08:15 +0200, Henrik K wrote:
Why don't you simply maintain your wordlists in some files and use a script
to generate portmanteau.cf? You could use Regexp::Assemble module to
optimize also. Who cares what the actual rules look like? The more
Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 16:27 +0200, Henrik K wrote:
If you have enough words to require multiple REs, then sorting doesn't hurt.
So the start boundaries for a single RE to catch on are minimized.
OK, so there are benefits if every alternate in a regex starts
j wrote:
I've been having the same problem from several locations/ISPs, since
mid-Saturday.
500 Can't connect to yerp.org:80 (connect: timeout)
Dave
Anyone figure this out? I have received the same yerp.org down errors and
it's
screwing up my SA royally. I guess this is what we
tonjg wrote:
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
So, how many tokens do you have in your db now?
I hope this command gives the correct answer...
# sa-learn --dump magic
0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db version
0.000 0514 0 non-token data:
tonjg wrote:
Yet Another Ninja wrote:
Did you also install the plugins?
These two are not delivered with SA.
I thought they were. In my system I've got:
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.002005/updates_spamassassin_org/25_razor2.cf
/usr/share/spamassassin/25_razor2.cf
and
Kaleb Hosie wrote:
I've just finished updating my production server to SpamAssassin 3.3.0 and I
immediately ran sa-update to get the latest rule set for SpamAssassin. Is
there a way to tell whether sa-update downloaded the latest definitions
correctly?
A user has just emailed me with some
Keith De Souza wrote:
I'm trying to understand why is it taking 300.0 seconds to scan a
message only 24Kb in size??
I'm begeining to think that because SA is taking so long to scan the
message, it is timing out
and hence Exim returning a temporarily reject after DATA.
My thoughs so far is
martinmcnally wrote:
Is it possible to have domain specific configuration files for spamassassin?
I am using spamd and would like to set a different required_score for my
different domains for example.
example1.com required_score 6.0
example2.com required_score 8.0
Anyone know if this is
I think you intended this for the list.
Rajesh M wrote:
hi
there is a work around for this
if you standard score is say : 5.0
you can write a header rule to allocate a positive or negative score if
the to field contains the specific domain
example
required_score 5
header header1 To
Dennis B. Hopp wrote:
I have AWL enabled and it seems to be ok with helping out legitimate
senders that occasionally send a spammy type message, but lately I
have seen an increase where AWL is adding a negative score to a very
blatant spam.
So my questions are, do people feel AWL is worth
yongke wrote:
Hi guys
Is there anyway to filter out phishing emails using spam assassin?
My current test email wasn't blocked and SA had a score 0f 0:
[ Wire transfer scam email ]
This is a fairly innocuous email. There is not much there to key on.
You could try adding rules for things
Micah Anderson wrote:
This is version '1.2.74-4' from Debian... but now looking closer, it
seems as if dcc was removed after Debian Etch. It seems that it was
removed because the upstream authors changed its license to non-free
(according to Debian's DFSG) in version 1.30. This also means that
Jari Fredriksson wrote:
90_2tld.cf has been replaced by the official rule file 20_aux_tlds.cf.
I have this in my channels.txt that I use with sa-update.
Is it enough to remove the channel, and the rule file disappears on next
sa-update, or does the old remnant keep on ghosting on the system
Raphael Bauduin wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to help someone using Exim with the Debian packaged
spamassassin 3.2.5-2 and sa-exim 4.2.1-11
I've looked for information on how a mail is processed precisely but
didn't find any explanation of the following.
In the spamd logs, I see that each mail is
Rejaine Monteiro wrote:
Sorry if I was not very clear (my english is a little poor)
in fact, I wanted to decrease the score obtained if SPF return OK
Probably not a good idea. The last set of stats that I saw indicated
that SPF_PASS was more likely to occur in spam than in ham. This is why
Tux Techie wrote:
hi,
I'm new to linux and Need help in configuring spamassassin on my
mail server,I'm using spamassassin-3.2.4-1.el4.1 on CentOS4 with
sendmail-8.13.1-3.3.el4
This is my local.cf http://local.cf/
bayes_ignore_header X-Spam-Flag
Tux Techie wrote:
I've inserted score FH_DATE_PAST_20XX 0 without the quotes to the
end of your local.cf http://local.cf file to disable the rule for
2010 bug.
You need to double-check this entry and then restart spamd since the
rule is still hitting on all of the examples you gave. If
Anshul Chauhan wrote:
This rule is in my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf http://local.cf
as FH_DATE_PAST_20XX 0 and in
/var/lib/spmassassin//3.002004/updates_spamassassin_org as #score
FH_DATE_PAST_20XX 2.075 3.384 3.554 3.188 # n=2 i've commented the
line in /var/lib/spamassassin.
How
Christian Gregoire wrote:
Hi,
Using SA v3.3.1 spamc command-line client : the message analyzed being either
spam or ham, can I have the message left untouched except for the X-Spam
headers ? For example, in case of a spam message, I'd like to have:
From: Test t...@example.com
To:
ram wrote:
/usr/bin/spamd -V
SpamAssassin Server version 3.3.1
running on Perl 5.8.8
with SSL support (IO::Socket::SSL 1.01)
with zlib support (Compress::Zlib 1.42)
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Jari Fredriksson ja...@iki.fi
mailto:ja...@iki.fi wrote:
On 28.4.2010 9:10,
Carlos Mennens wrote:
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Dennis B. Hopp dh...@coreps.com wrote:
Autolearn kicks in at certain scores. I believe the default is 12.0 for
spam and 0.1 for ham. You can customize those settings in your local.cf
file.
bayes_auto_learn 1
David B Funk wrote:
On Wed, 28 Apr 2010, Frank Heydlauf wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 08:05:27PM +0100, Martin Gregorie wrote:
[snip..]
Or could I just use a rule like:
header From =~ /\...@.*\@/
This regex matches i.e.
From: u...@example.com
ram wrote:
i still see this errors
May 5 10:28:03.484 [3153] dbg: config: warning: score set for
non-existent rule SHORTCIRCUIT
May 5 10:28:03.485 [3153] dbg: config: warning: score set for
non-existent rule SUBJ_RE_NUM
May 5 10:28:03.485 [3153] dbg: config: warning: score set for
ram wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com
mailto:bowie_bai...@buc.com wrote:
ram wrote:
i still see this errors
May 5 10:28:03.484 [3153] dbg: config: warning: score set for
non-existent rule SHORTCIRCUIT
May 5 10
Lauro Costa G. Borges wrote:
I configured some addresses to be -9.0 or even -20.0 on Amavis (there
were some addresses with -3.0, from default config on Ubuntu), does
that make it possible that SpamAssassin will mark some emails with a
pontuation higher than they should be, or were in the
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
Hi all,
I am constantly getting the server reached --max children setting entries in
my log
I started with 10 max children and have been raising it by 2. I am now at
40 , but still getting the messages (though not as often) how high can I go
given these
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
Just accept the fact that mail gets into a queue when using processes like
SA. If outgoing spam is not a concern, set your system so that outbound
mail is not passed thru SA.
I actually only use the exim/sa as incoming filter, I do not send through it.
The
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Tue 25 May 2010 10:01:12 PM CEST, Benny Pedersen wrote
# save rule as 99_local_bugs_331.cf
# SA = 3.3.1
if (version == 3.003001)
uri __PROTOCOL_OK m{^https?://\w+}
meta PROTOCOL_FIX (!__PROTOCOL_OK)
describe PROTOCOL_FIX protocol in uri is not lowercase
Randy Ramsdell wrote:
IIRC, when I sent messages through sa-learn on the old mail server as
spam, then checking with spamassassin debug, this would show a 3.5
BAYES score. I will double check this, but I would hope to at least
add a positive score when training a spam message.
Training a
aquero wrote:
Hi,
When i checked the third party softwares for spam-assassin i found many
custom rule sets. Do I have to install these rule sets manually? If I
perform sa-update, will it will include all these rule sets into my
spam-assassin rules list?
Before you start adding a bunch of
aquero wrote:
Bowie Bailey wrote:
aquero wrote:
Hi,
When i checked the third party softwares for spam-assassin i found many
custom rule sets. Do I have to install these rule sets manually? If I
perform sa-update, will it will include all these rule sets into my
spam-assassin
I was looking at the hits on a drug spam and I noticed these two:
* 1.1 NO_PRESCRIPTION BODY: No prescription needed
* 1.5 FB_NO_SCRIP_NEEDED BODY: Phrase: no prescription needed.
The rules themselves are very similar. Should these two be combined?
--
Bowie
I just noticed the new version of iXhash (from over a year ago).
The config file in this version has all of the scores set to 0.1. I
can't copy my old scores over because I have no idea how (or if) the new
domains map to the old ones.
Are there a set of recommended scores for this rule set?
Ned Slider wrote:
On 06/10/2010 10:45 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 09.06.10 10:10, Bowie Bailey wrote:
I was looking at the hits on a drug spam and I noticed these two:
* 1.1 NO_PRESCRIPTION BODY: No prescription needed
* 1.5 FB_NO_SCRIP_NEEDED BODY: Phrase: no prescription needed
Per Jessen wrote:
I have a bit of SA code where I strip leading and trailing whitespace -
foreach (@addrs) { s/^\s*([^\s]+)\s*$/\1/; }
Whenever I run this I get the warning \1 better written as $1 which I
understand to be perl telling me that the right side of s/// should use
$digit, not
Daniel Lemke wrote:
Hi,
I want to check some mails for their char count (will be part of a meta
rule) but spamassassin does hit the rule, even if the mail has less chars
than defined in regex.
The regex was tested in Perl and was working fine, so what did I miss?
body
Bowie Bailey wrote:
Daniel Lemke wrote:
Hi,
I want to check some mails for their char count (will be part of a meta
rule) but spamassassin does hit the rule, even if the mail has less chars
than defined in regex.
The regex was tested in Perl and was working fine, so what did I miss
Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 6/21/10 3:25 PM, Sharma, Ashish wrote:
Hi,
I have the latest version of spamassassin, I am unable to find the
logic behind the following rule and it's high spam score.
MANY_SPAN_IN_TEXT 3.099
Can anybody give a reason?
grep MANY_SPAN_IN_TEXT *
David Michaels wrote:
I don't mean to be stupid.. and I know that this should be done with
sieve but..
Is there a obvious reason this doesn't work?
I think it's the To thats messing up..
header __GK__PHARMS_01 To =~ micha...@ucrwcu.rwc.uc.edu
header __GK__PHARMS_02 Subject =~
David Michaels wrote:
I'm still not matching it the rule is a derivative of this other that
does work for me..
header __GK_CANA_PHARMS_01 Subject =~
/DISCOUNT|GOOD|CANADA|FREE|ONLINE|SALE|STORE|BEST|USA|Product|BUY/i
header __GK_CANA_PHARMS_02 Subject =~ /PHARMA|cialis|MEDICAL/i
meta
Daniel Lemke wrote:
Hmm, I've just noticed that my rule is working fine for simple text
messages, but is also been triggered when checking mails containing html
(http://pastebin.com/xB7SKnFV).
rawbody T__SHORT_MAIL /\A.{0,150}\z/s
-D reports:
Jun 28 13:32:40.961 [4200] dbg: rules:
Mike Grau wrote:
Hello,
I'm getting a lot of FPs from FH_FAKE_RCVD_LINE_B RCVD line looks faked
(B) since the default score for this rule is a whopping 4.000.
It's matching on this header:
Received: from 68.103.178.110 by webmail.east.cox.net; Mon, 28 Jun 2010
18:02:23 -0400
This rule
On 7/8/2010 10:52 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:
2010-07-08 09:05:01 1OWqmi-0005N3-JU /*SA: Action: flagged as Spam but
accepted: score=4.0 required=4.0 */(scanned in 0/0 secs | Message-Id:
20100708130436.52c7d1cb1...@mail.microton.com.br). From
care...@habitat.com (host=NULL [189.26.124.122]) for
On 7/14/2010 8:42 AM, Emin Akbulut wrote:
I run SA Win32 port 3.3.1 by JAM Software on Windows Server 2008 64 bit.
Spamassassin.exe always calculates the same score, coz User_Prefs file is
under my docs (C:\Users\ea\.spamassassin)
However spamd.exe -which runs as service- calculates the
On 7/19/2010 8:23 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
On 7/16/2010 2:31 PM, Cliff Hayes wrote:
Hello,
Our webmail server is on the same server as sendmail and spamassassin.
I would like to filter outbound webmail but can't because the most recent
versions of spamassassin have 127.0.0.1 trusted by
On 7/24/2010 10:35 AM, Suhag P Desai wrote:
Hi Mailing List users,
This is my first message in this mail community and I am evaluating SA
very first time.
I have few question in my mind regarding working of SA. I gone through
a FAQ and some documentation from official SA websites.
On 7/26/2010 5:58 AM, andrij wrote:
Hi all,
I am new to spamassassin and bayes classifier. I have several questions and
I will greatly appreciate your help with that.
1) Training of the bayes classifier with _multipart_ e-mails (e.g., an
e-mail contains other e-mails within its body). If I
On 7/26/2010 10:12 AM, andrij wrote:
2) Evaluating whether an email is spam or not. Again, if I set
bayes_ignore_header Some-header, will the bayes classifier ignore the
header while evaluating an e-mail?
Yes. That's what it's for.
So, the bayes clasifier will ignore Some-header in both
problem. I am not sure whethere my SA is working.
If I want to scan internal-to-internal / internal to external, what changes
to be done in my configuration. ?
Thanks,
-Original Message-
From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:bowie_bai...@buc.com]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 7:09 PM
To: users
On 7/26/2010 2:46 PM, andrij wrote:
Bowie Bailey wrote:
3) Evaluating whether an email is spam or not. Does the bayes
classifier
analyze headers if I have, for example, the following rule: body
BAYES_05
eval:check_bayes('0.00', '0.05'). According to the
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin
On 7/30/2010 10:58 AM, Adam Moskowitz wrote:
Background: SpamAssassin version 3.2.5 running on Perl version 5.8.8 on
CentOS release 5.2 (Final) -- all set up for me by my sysadmin. Everything
works fine when using all the defaults. However . . .
I want to use spamassassin's per-user
On 7/30/2010 12:14 PM, Adam Moskowitz wrote:
Earlier today, I wrote:
I want to use spamassassin's per-user whitelisting as part of some mail
processing I'm doing.
. . .
spamassassin takes a long time to load and run
. . .
Can I arrange to load/run only the tests I need? If so, how?
Sorry,
On 7/30/2010 3:08 PM, Emin Akbulut wrote:
Simply disable regular ruleset and test again. If it takes 6.93-5.78
seconds or
something similar, you are right.
I'm actually having the same issue on my new home server. I set up SA
and got it working. Then I ran sa-compile, enabled the plugin in
On 7/30/2010 3:26 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 7/30/2010 3:08 PM, Emin Akbulut wrote:
Simply disable regular ruleset and test again. If it takes 6.93-5.78
seconds or
something similar, you are right.
I'm actually having the same issue on my new home server. I set up SA
and got it working
On 8/4/2010 4:23 AM, Happy Chap wrote:
Hi,
We started getting (over the last 2 months say) lots of spam, which
Spamassassin isn't picking up as spam. Analysing these, they all seem to be
of the same type where many paragraphs of random text are hidden inside an
HTML comment (either
On 8/4/2010 4:24 PM, Happy Chap wrote:
Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 8/4/2010 4:23 AM, Happy Chap wrote:
You ARE manually training bayes (sa-learn) on these missed spams,
right? That is probably the most useful thing you can do if you are
getting Bayes_00 on them.
Hi Bowie, oh yes, every night
On 8/4/2010 6:07 PM, Happy Chap wrote:
No, we're not using an SQL backend and every users has their own bayes
database.
You mentioned previously that you are using 'sa-learn -u'. I thought
that option only worked with SQL databases?
In my setup, I have lots of virtual users under the same
On 8/5/2010 5:58 AM, Mike Tonks wrote:
Hi folks,
I'm looking into hooking the Mail::SpamAssassin module into a perl
processor for a couple of web forms - contact us, comments form, and
publish an article form (open publishing).
The main barrier seems to be the need for a message format
On 8/5/2010 2:11 PM, Matthew Kitchin (public/usenet) wrote:
Amavisd could reject the mail. I was planning on using Spamassassin
(with a custom built rule) to examine the email for the names. We
would only use the names of our patients. The names would be dumped
out of our patient DB every
On 8/5/2010 3:00 PM, Matthew Kitchin (public/usenet) wrote:
On 8/5/2010 1:52 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
My approach to doing something like this would be to have a rule that
matches the names (however you implement it), and then have the MTA
check for that particular rule hit and bounce
On 8/6/2010 12:18 PM, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Randy Ramsdell rramsd...@activedg.com:
I found an bug in spamassassin that can be reliably reproduced when
using our local rules. What would be interesting is to track down
where this bug is exactly.
1. The process
I was looking through some of the spam rules, and I noticed that the
JM_SOUGHT_FRAUD rules are included in the main SA updates channel for SA
3.3.1, but the scores are all 0. Is there a reason for this?
The rules from the sought channel have scores, but they are being
overridden by the main
On 8/11/2010 11:46 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 10:59 -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote:
I was looking through some of the spam rules, and I noticed that the
JM_SOUGHT_FRAUD rules are included in the main SA updates channel for SA
3.3.1, but the scores are all 0
On 8/11/2010 12:17 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 11:57 -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 8/11/2010 11:46 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 10:59 -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote:
I was looking through some of the spam rules, and I noticed
On 8/11/2010 3:30 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010, Bowie Bailey wrote:
Right. And I'm checking for updates several times a day. If the
updates channel is not keeping up with sought, I need to make sure I
am running the rules from the dedicated channel and not the updates
On 8/11/2010 7:15 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010, Bowie Bailey wrote:
In case anyone else is following this...
The sa-update process made things a bit more complex than simply
renaming the file after updates. If that's all you do, then
sa-update loses track of the file
On 8/11/2010 6:15 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
The problem is, that not only the sub-rules change, but with them the
actually scored meta rules, combining these sub-rules by OR-ing them.
That means, stale meta rules in stock will override the fresh meta
rules, effectively discarding all
On 8/11/2010 10:32 PM, nonlin wrote:
Well I am not out of the Dog House yet.
So, by some miracle I was able to get yum to work and was able to use it to
update Spamassassion. I was so happy because this was the safest way to do
this. But yum didn't have ver 3.3 available so I was able to
On 8/12/2010 8:49 AM, Tim Thorburn wrote:
Hello,
I've run into an issue with a mailbox where large amounts of spam are
making their way through filters. The majority of these spam messages
receive SA scores of 0.3-1.6; for obvious reasons I cannot adjust the
filter sensitivity this
.
Or, well, any SA or channel provided method, to tweak the order. SA
method would be a new feature. Channel method would be a rename, to come
last in alphabetical order.
Bummer. :( This is a real problem and worth filing a bug.
On 12.08.10 09:13, Bowie Bailey wrote:
Would it be a reasonable
/spamassassin/RuleUpdates#Using_sa-update
- Original Message -
From: Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Spamassassion for each site
On 8/11/2010 10:32 PM, nonlin wrote:
Well I am not out of the Dog House
On 8/12/2010 7:37 PM, nonlin wrote:
Dear friends,
I don't mean to be condescending but it look like no one is really reading
my posts.
I had run sa-update, /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002004 owner is root and I ran
sa-update as root. and it looked like it updated. and I just ran it again
now
On 8/13/2010 8:47 PM, nonlin wrote:
Dear all,
Thank you all for your assistance.
After all the fuss I have been making, I forgot the one rule that I
have learned from dealing with electrics, always check your equipment
before you use it!. since I was the admin I use outlook express to
On 8/14/2010 5:51 PM, mouss wrote:
Le 12/08/2010 00:37, Karsten Bräckelmann a écrit :
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 17:30 -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote:
In case anyone else is following this...
The sa-update process made things a bit more complex than simply
renaming the file after updates. If that's
On 8/16/2010 7:00 AM, Mynabbler wrote:
I think everybody and their dog made a ruleset regarding 'your email address
has won'. Something like:
MN_YEAHRIGHT /\bYour (?:email|e-mail) (?:address|account) (?:has won|just
won you)\b/
How do you make the second argument optional? So it also hits
On 8/16/2010 4:05 PM, Jason Haar wrote:
Hi there
For the past few weeks we've experienced a large increase in missed
spam. It's Pharma-related, one sentence plus a link.
The interesting features are:
* every Subject line is different. They're aren't Bayes-busters either -
all Pharma
C. Bensend wrote:
Then you haven't been getting the regular updates. If you don't have
updates.spamassassin.org in your --channelfile, it won't check it...
No, I stand corrected, sorry for the misinformation. At the very
top of the file (they had scrolled out of my term), I have:
301 - 400 of 1325 matches
Mail list logo
