Matt Kettler wrote:
Jack Gostl wrote:
I have an odd problem. I have a user receiving spam from something like
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Since he does business with verybigcompany.com,
he had them in his white list, and as expected, the spam slipped through.
Based on the advice I got
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MK Let's say you speak English and Chinese, and hate Russian because you
MK get lots of spam in that text format and don't speak it.
That's me, English and Chinese, and hate Russian.
MK In this situation, why would you want not_ok_localles ru instead of
MK
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway, Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf should admit that it doesn't mention
What if I hate a specific language, people, culture. Is there e.g., a
not_ok_locales?
Don't put the answer here, put it on Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf, even if
the answer is that there is no answer.
Jack Gostl wrote:
- Original Message - From: Matt Kettler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jack Gostl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: spam users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: whitelist
Matt Kettler wrote:
Jack Gostl wrote:
I have an odd problem. I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MK I'll be happy to change my assumptions, but can you name any good reason
MK why they would want to do so?
The Matt theme: restrict oneself from getting mail from any but a few
safe people, languages, or whatever. Life goes on in its familiar grey
days. But alas,
Daniel J McDonald wrote:
It would be a harmless confusion, but if you specified:
not_ok_locales se
ok_locales en
The ok_locales would do nothing at all. We'll have to document that
*very* carefully.
Maybe something like:
ok_locales !se all
Hmm, that's a bit confusing to me,
Stefan Jakobs wrote:
Let's assume you running a mailrelay for a university and your users are from
different countries. Lets assume further on you have no Swedish people at
your university (and you get a lot of spam from Sweden). Then it would be
nice to have a not_ok_locales option,
Matt Kettler wrote:
Stefan Jakobs wrote:
Let's assume you running a mailrelay for a university and your users are
from
different countries. Lets assume further on you have no Swedish people at
your university (and you get a lot of spam from Sweden). Then it would be
nice to have
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Maybe the devs can briefly explain how the charset is being determined.
Or at least, where exactly in the code one could find it...
Matt, also, I got a feeling, that logic is what the OP is actually
about. He does not want to leave out what he wants to be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
M or does he think
All we know is users don't think like we do. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/
Fundamentally, SpamAssassin is a tool written by system administrators,
for system administrators and advanced users.
Like it or not, the project's primary goal has always
Asif Iqbal wrote:
Hi All
I took a message and learned it as ham like this
cat email-with-headers | sa-learn --ham
Now I should expect the exact same email to be considered as ham. Correct?
No. You'd expect the bayes score to go down, but that alone might not be
enough.
But it does
Iann Gorrill wrote:
Hello everyone,
We have a form that makes use of the phpmail class
(http://phpmailer.sourceforge.net) that for one reason or another,
triggers the MIME_HTML_ONLY BODY rule on every scan, stating that only
a text/html Content type was found, yet there is clearly a plain
Matthew Goodman wrote:
Hi all,
I have some pretty good bayes_seen and bayes_toks files, I’m down to
about 2-3 spams per day (if that) with 50+ a day getting caught. Would
it be helpful for me to copy my bayes_seen and bayes_toks files to
other users?
Using qmail with vpopmail
Asif Iqbal wrote:
On Dec 7, 2007 10:13 PM, Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Asif Iqbal wrote:
Hi All
I took a message and learned it as ham like this
cat email-with-headers | sa-learn --ham
Now I should expect the exact same email to be considered as ham. Correct
irzyxel wrote:
ive created a custome.cf in my spamassassin folder, sa is readin it, cause my
simple text rule
body TEST_RULE /gwx/
score TEST_RULE 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
describe TEST_RULE Test Regel
is working. but as soon as i do the slightest regex, it doesnt trigger
anymore ...
rawbody
Philipp Snizek wrote:
You use Bayes?
Have you tried turning off auto_expire? From my expierence this can cause
significant performance issues.
It shouldn't cause performance issues. It should only cause, at worst,
one message every 12 hours or so to take a long time (ie: 10 minutes).
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi all,
I add this lines in user_prefs:
add_header spam Flag _YESNOCAPS_
add_header all Level _STARS(*)_
add_header all Status _YESNO_, score=_SCORE_ required=_REQD_
add_header all Tests _TESTS_
add_header all Autolearn _AUTOLEARN_ \n Version=_VERSION_
add_header
Marc Perkel wrote:
What causes this?
reporter: razor2 report failed: No such file or directory report
requires authentication
You didn't run razor-admin --register?
Michael Grant wrote:
On Dec 12, 2007 1:09 AM, Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
What causes this?
reporter: razor2 report failed: No such file or directory report
requires authentication
You didn't run razor-admin --register?
Funny, I too
Michael Grant wrote:
-report?
Ahh, I had to do a razor-admin like this:
su - root
# razor-admin -create
# razor-admin -register
Even though I had done this initially as just 'su', it was using my
homedir to create the .razor directory.
Yep. Technically you only needed the -,
peter pilsl wrote:
sorry for posting again a question regarding the same topic, but I think
I found out more in the meantime and can ask a better question.
I've a user [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following entries in my
autowhitelist:
20.0(40.0/2) -- [EMAIL
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 11:29:21AM -0500, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
I have doing some checking of spam messages that make it through our
mail filtering systems and noticed that the spam score does not reflect
what I get when checking manually.
An example spam report:
Jason Bennett wrote:
Is there a central repository somewhere of custom plugins available for
SA? I've find a few in the wiki but I was wondering if there was a site
that had a good selection of them?
Well, the wiki has a list 29 of them, which I would consider more than
a few:
Per Jessen wrote:
John Rudd wrote:
The server is in Germany - anyway, I can't be bothered to deal with a
mailadmin who rejects based on blackholes.us ... I just curious given
the staleness of the data.
If the server is in Germany, then I don't see how staleness of the
data
Per Jessen wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
It doesn't as far as the rejected mail goes - but it does matter wrt
the usefulness of blackholes.us. Which is all I'm asking about.
True. Although this is the SpamAssassin mailing list, so, within
context
Alex Woick wrote:
Matt Kettler schrieb am 14.12.2007 03:46:
1) Plugins are somewhat new to SA (ie: 3.0.0 and higher)
2) While not really hard, the work involved in making a sa plugin is
non-trivial
3) You have to know perl.
The real challenge in writing a plugin is not the coding itself
Clay Davis wrote:
I've see several people write this. Can someone point me to some debate
I can review? It seems to me that if you set the autolearn threshold
fairly high and keep any eye on your bayes scoring, it would be a good
thing.
IMHO, autolearning is a good thing. However,
Ken Morley wrote:
I'm using Postfix 2.4.6, Amavisd-new 2.5.2, ClamAV 0.91.2 and
Mail-SpamAssassin 3.2.3 in a Linux mail filter.
As I recall, SA used to have some rules that penalized e-mail
originating from mass-emailing applications like The Bat!. I see
some of these now slipping
Joe Zitnik wrote:
On 12/18/2007 at 9:00 AM, Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Clay Davis wrote:
I've see several people write this. Can someone point me to some debate
I can review? It seems to me that if you set the autolearn threshold
fairly high and keep any eye on your bayes
Per Jessen wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
That's easily checked - we could run a comparison of any up-to-date
geoip database against blackholes.us.
True.
Well, I've answered my own question. I ran a test of maxmind addresses
dated 2007/04/04 against the blackholes.us data
James E. Pratt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Dan Grossman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 7:21 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: How often is the main rules channel updated?
I'm worried that my cronjob for sa-update is not working
Paolo De Marco wrote:
Hi.
There is a way to stop tests when the score of the mail is higher then
a value?
Not in a general sense, but there is a shortcircuit plugin that can be
used to stop checking when a particular rule hits.
You can also use the rule priority to cause the trusted
Chris wrote:
Can anyone let me know how to delete from server, if the score is over
8 please ?
Any help appreciated.
Spamassassin itself can't delete mail, as it has no control over the
envelope. If it tried, most tools that call SA would assume it crashed
and recover the original, unscanned
R. Portier wrote:
Hello,
Context
===
I use SpamAssassin 3.2.3 on Debian 4.0 i386
spamd is invoked with options : -u spamassassin -m 5 -H /etc/spamassassin
(-D -u spamassassin -m 5 -H /etc/spamassassin when in debug mode)
The home for user spamassassin is /none (this directory does
Remy PORTIER wrote:
Hello,
Thank you for your answer.
I agree with you, but there is still something puzzling me.
I have an old SpamAssassin 3.0.3 running on another server.
Pretty much the same configuration (running as user spamassassin,
allow_user_prefs 1, ...).
This old version of
Yet Another Ninja wrote:
On 12/20/2007 10:44 PM, jikke wrote:
Hi,
I'm new to SpamAssassin and have checked the web on spam rules. I
just can't
seem to find the info I'm looking for. I want to create a rule where all
mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a certain text like 'new message' is
passed
rboynton wrote:
We're using 3.2.3 with Mailtraq calling the spamd. If I change the
required_score to 9.0 and reboot the system, spam messages still show the
required=6.3. We have no user_prefs defined.
I assume by this you mean your user_prefs file is empty... If you mean
something else,
Saurabh Bhasin wrote:
Hello,
I recently upgraded to p5-Mail-SpamAssassin-3.2.3.
The vpopmail version I'm using is:
pkg_info | grep vpop
p5-vpopmail-0.08Perl module to provide access to vpopmail API
qmailadmin-1.2.10,1 CGI program for administering Qmail with
vchkpw/vpopmail
Nikos K. wrote:
Dear All,
I had a mail server with the following characteristics:
Redhat9 (Kernel 2.4.20-8)
Squirrelmail-1.4.3a-1
Spamassassin 3.0.1.
The mail server was working fine but the spamassassing was missing a lot of
spam messages. So, I tried to upgrade it to version 3.1.8. by
Leonardo Rodrigues Magalhães wrote:
i would like to give some score for messages that came from IP
addresses that does not have the reverse correctly configured. I have
seen a lot of IPs that have some reverse name, but that name does not
point back to the IP address.
is it possible
Henk S wrote:
I experience the same problem.
Lots of spam and normal e-mail have X_Spam_Status: No, score=. And
X_spam_Flag: NO
But not all. Sometimes it is: Yes, score=7.7 and marked as spam, sometimes
No, score=2.0 and ofcourse not marked as spam. Even No, score=0.0.
What is causing this
Justin Mason wrote:
Theo Van Dinter writes:
It depends on your SA version. It used to be 256k, but apparently 3.2
upped it to 500k.
not be an issue. These messages are well below 256M. milter-spamc
only sends down the first 64K of the message in fact.
Wow, that would
Marc Perkel wrote:
I was wondering about how to get a blacklist included in the SA
distribution. I have a blacklist and whitelist that are both very
good. I've been publishing it for about a year now. But I have a few
questions.
What are the licensing requirements that I have to give to be
Sven Juergensen (KielNET) wrote:
Hi list,
i was posting this subject a while
ago and recently had some time to
look into it some more.
Apparently, whenever $SOMETHING isn't
part of the envelope and/or body,
spamassassin falls back to the user
which is owning the process.
Spamassassin
Per Jessen wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
What kind of bandwidth does it usually pull from servers when it is
part of the default distribution?
I have 5 servers now at 3 locations and soon to add a 6th at a 4th
location. Is this enough?
For that, I have no clue.. probably not a lot
Sg wrote:
Hi
Thanks your reply. Already I went through the site , but we are
using Linux with Spamassasin. We need to check the newsletter's body
content only in SA. Please tell me the exact rules in SA for
spamassassin body content.
There's hundreds of rules for body content used in
ram wrote:
https://ecm.netcore.co.in/tmp/dinner.eml.txt
The scam works like this:
They send you a mail asking wether you accept credit cards at your
hotel
They get you to confirm you will accept credit card for payment. Once
you agree they ask you to bill them extra fictional charges
Loren Wilton wrote:
There is a standard template that gives the form of the report in the
mail message. I don't recall which cf file this is normally in, but
it sounds like that file is not being included in the cf files in your
configuration.
I would check include paths and possibly
Dan Barker wrote:
[9060] dbg: metadata: X-Spam-Relays-Trusted:
There are no trusted relays.
[9060] dbg: metadata: X-Spam-Relays-Untrusted: [ ip=169.200.184.174 rdns=
helo=sls-sn-smtp-pmail3.wachovia.com by=mail.visioncomm.net ident= envfrom=
intl=0 id=
A1253F3B0064 auth= msa=0 ] [
Sg wrote:
Hi
Thanks for your reply. I need to checck the body content only not
header. What are all the rules used to check only body content?
You already asked this question, and I already answered it in your
thread titled Spam content checker:
--
There's hundreds
Sven Juergensen (KielNET) wrote:
Hello Matt,
turns out that the script supplied by the
designers of the whole mess is, well,
suboptimal. I kicked it entirely and used
a single command line to run a per-recipient
checking.
Just for info: whenever spamc can't find
the $recipient or is lacking a
Stefan Suurmeijer wrote:
Hi list,
I'm trying to use spamassassin with per-user rules on a machine
running Linux with sendmail 8.14.2 and cyrus imapd 2.2.12.
I'm running into a small problem: it seems that spamd doesn't know
which user the mail is intended for and therefore always uses the
Noah wrote:
Hi there list,
I installed the following spamassasin proggies on my FreeBSD machine
and receiving an error auto-whitelist file failed: locker: safe_lock:
cannot create tmp lockfile
Any clues what I am doing wrong?
# pkg_info | grep Spam
p5-Mail-SpamAssassin-3.2.3 A highly
Stefan Suurmeijer wrote:
Hi Matt,
On Jan 8, 2008 2:36 AM, Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stefan Suurmeijer wrote:
Jan 8 00:47:29 smtp1 spamd[11786]: spamd: connection from
localhost [
127.0.0.1 http://127.0.0.1 http://127.0.0.1
Ben Lentz wrote:
Has anyone done anything like this?
Any suggestions on how to do it?
Any other way to get the count?
man mailstats
I like mailgraph: http://mailgraph.schweikert.ch/
There's also six dozen other tools out there that will graph using
rrdtool or MRTG.
A simple web search
Sg wrote:
Hi
In the SA rules, i've hide the header test names in all the .cf files
and restarted the spamassassin. But i believe, it displaying wrong
result (compared this with lyris content checker). Please guide me,
how to check the score for content checker using SA rules.
Since SA is
using any API (php, perl, python)?
Thanks
Sg
On Jan 9, 2008 5:51 AM, Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sg wrote:
Hi
In the SA rules, i've hide the header test names in all the .cf
files
and restarted the spamassassin. But i believe
Michael Weber wrote:
Hello!
I have gotten several emails over the past 3 weeks with a really crazy AWL
score. Here's the headers from a message with a 4138 AWL score.
Where should I begin looking for this one?
That's so crazy, I'd want to see the AWL debugging..
spamassassin -D
Matthew Goodman wrote:
Why does spam continually get a “hit” on this rule? I noticed a lot
more spam coming in off the upgrade to 3.2.4. Are spammers getting
crafty with their mail messages to appear as coming from myself TO
myself? I could always reduce the adjustment that USER_IN_WHITELIST
fchan wrote:
Hi,
I updated from spamassassin 3.2.3 to 3.2.4 and I'm still getting these
question marks in score from spamassassin.
Here is a sample of the header I get with this message:
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 23882 invoked by uid 501);
Matthew Goodman wrote:
I am also having this error in my spamd.log file.
Spamd is being run with:
SPAMD_OPTS=-c -d -v -m 40 -s local4 -q -u vpopmail
--virtual-config-dir=/var/vpopmail/domains/%d/%l/.spamassassin/ -H
/var/vpopmail
And spamc is being called by qmail-scanner-2.01 with
Matthew Goodman wrote:
A downgrade to SpamAssassin 3.2.3 returns functionality with per-user
settings immediately. Any notes on what handle_user does and whether this is
a new function of 3.2.4?
It's not new. In fact, it was introduced into spamd somewhere between SA
1.3 (October 2001) and
Jason Haar wrote:
Hi there
I just got a one-line piece of spam with a ipaddress-based URL.
Probably pointing at some auto infect your Windows PC app.
Anyway, it got a score of 0.1 out of 5 when it came in. 4 hours later
it had showed up in several RBLs and the score was pushed up to 4.9.
Jean-Edouard Babin wrote:
Hi,
My mail system use virtual user.
I use spamd like this
spamd --virtual-config-dir=/srv/spamassassin/%d/%l -x -u dovecot -c -i
127.0.0.1 http://127.0.0.1 -d -r /var/run/spamd.pid
I run spamc with
/usr/pkg/bin/spamc -u ${recipient} -f -e ...
This work fine, each
Stefan Jakobs wrote:
Hello list,
I'm using amavisd-new with spamassassin and for some tests I have to disable
all network tests in spamassassin except for sorbs, njabl, uribl and maybe
some other blackhole lists.
I guess I can comment out the corresponding header lines in the files
You can't run the rules in score-order without driving SA's performance
into the ground.
The key here is SA doesn't run tests sequentially, it runs them in
parallel as it works its way through the body. this allows for good,
efficient use of memory cache.
By running rules in score-order,
Robert - elists wrote:
You can't run the rules in score-order without driving SA's performance
into the ground.
The key here is SA doesn't run tests sequentially, it runs them in
parallel as it works its way through the body. this allows for good,
efficient use of memory cache.
By running
Matt Kettler wrote:
No, I'm saying it breaks the emails into pieces, then for the first
piece, it runs all the rules. Then it runs all the rules on the second
piece, and the third, and the fourth, etc.
Forcing score order causes it to run the whole message on one rule,
then then whole
Loren Wilton wrote:
Well, it looks like I need to spend some time reading the code to
study exactly how SA runs rules, and see if it's doing something that
pollutes the memory cache, which would cause the over-sorting to not
matter..
As best I recall, it runs rules by type, and sorted by
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm running SpamAssassin version 3.1.8 on SuSE 9.3. Spamassassin is
invoked through amavisd.
I have a series of whitelist_from commands in my
/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf, which spamassassin recognizes. I also have
allow_user_rules 1
in my local.cf.
However,
Steven Stern wrote:
We had a server go crazy last night and reset its date into August of
2277. In any case, we've resolved that, but now I can't get bayes to
expire.
After the clocks was correctly set, I deleted all tokens that had a
lastupdate in the future, and also removed similar
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
Right, it is.
The URIWhois does not detect the registrar. It detects the name and the
address of the DNS- and whois-defined NSes for that domain.
So how is this substantially different from the URIDNSBL plugin that
comes with SA?
Bear in mind this plugin
Sébastien AVELINE wrote:
Hello,
You will find my top rules fired with spamassassin.
I have spamassassin on several boxes, each have his own bayes_db
files, I use razor, dcc_check, uribl, bayes We have hundreds of
thousand messages per day.
In my top rules for spam you will see a lot of
John D. Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Jeff Chan wrote:
Quoting Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The only big difference I see at face value is it uses whois instead of
DNS to find the NS records.. that hardly seems efficient..
Whois is definitely the wrong protocol to use
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 6:38 AM
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
Right, it is.
The URIWhois does not detect the registrar. It detects the name and
the
address of the DNS
Matt Kettler wrote:
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
It doesn't use whois *instead of* dns. It uses both and attempts even to
detect any discrepancy between their responses.
How are these going to be different?? The information published to
whois has to match the information published
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am running SpamAssassin version 3.1.7 with Postfix via amavisd on a
FreeBSD machine.
In the last few weeks, all of a sudden messages with the same 4 or 5
subject lines started coming through undetected for some reason.
So I decided to add patterns matching those
Post to the unsubscribe address, not the list.
See the headers of any message:
List-Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Xiang wrote:
Jeff Chan wrote:
Quoting Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Matt Kettler wrote:
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
It doesn't use whois *instead of* dns. It uses both and attempts
even to
detect any discrepancy between their responses.
Both types of queries can cause problems.
How are these going
Pardeep Sharma wrote:
Hello sir ,
Is it possible to configure spamassassin at the
gateway machine without using any MTA or mail server to protect spam
mail for internal mailserver
Do you mean like a transparent SMTP proxy?
That's ugly business, but if you really want to go
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 2:21 AM
Ahh, I see what you're doing, you're looking up the SOA. Which is
basically forcing the query down to the spammer's DNS server, and
opening yourself up
Mitchell Hudson wrote:
Hello there,
I have spamassassin loaded and is running pretty well, it's supposed
to be using bayes and I can't find any errors that would tell me why
it's not, but it's not. When I do a debug log there are no db
connection errors, in fact it's auto-learning just fine.
McDonald, Dan wrote:
I'm using amavisd-new and p0f with BOTNET.pl, and some Windows XP
machines are not being caught.
Here are my rules:
header L_P0F_WXP X-Amavis-OS-Fingerprint =~ /^Windows XP(?![^(]*\b2000 SP)/
score L_P0F_WXP 2.3
header L_P0F_W X-Amavis-OS-Fingerprint =~ /^Windows(?!
Matt Kettler wrote:
Mitchell Hudson wrote:
Hello there,
I have spamassassin loaded and is running pretty well, it's supposed
to be using bayes and I can't find any errors that would tell me why
it's not, but it's not. When I do a debug log there are no db
connection errors, in fact it's
Mark Martinec wrote:
header L_P0F_WXP X-Amavis-OS-Fingerprint =~ /^Windows XP(?![^(]*\b2000
SP)/ score L_P0F_WXP 2.3
header L_P0F_W X-Amavis-OS-Fingerprint =~ /^Windows(?! XP)/
score L_P0F_W 1.0
[...]
Matt Kettler wrote:
Well, that much should be obvious.
Both rules
Hard Coder wrote:
Hello,
I decided to benchmark the accuracy of spamassassin. Is there anything special
I should take into consideration before I start to flood with both ham and spam?
It's probably easiest if you have them on disk and use the mass-check
utility.
Mitchell Hudson wrote:
I did actually pull out the number of tokens and I have quite a few in
there:
0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db version
0.000 0 23930 0 non-token data: nspam
0.000 0 8304 0 non-token data:
--[ UxBoD ]-- wrote:
Hi,
I just had this message get through :-
snip
and it only scored 5.6. These are the rules it hit :-
1.23 ADVANCE_FEE_2
0.00 BAYES_50
0.72 SARE_URGBIZ Contains urgent matter
-0.00 SPF_PASS
2.08 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS
1.58 URG_BIZ
Looks like you might want to do
Note: I fixed your subject line to try to draw the attention of the
right people. Generic subject lines tend to get overlooked by folks with
specific interests, since many just skim the subject lines.
David Zinder wrote:
I think my problem is related to surbl.org, but I can't figure out how
David Zinder wrote:
Thank you for the response and suggestions.
Yes - lists.surbl.org - I was using the link Contacts-mailing lists
from www.surbl.org
If I understand the request for more info... It seems to get caught by
all the lists. Here is an example from an email this morning. I'm not
John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 17:51 -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
Perhaps Verizon is screwing up their DNS?
Ahh, yes they are:
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1227
Hrm.
As a troubleshooting hack for this increasingly-common feature,
perhaps a URIBL/DNSBL rule could
Cirrus wrote:
i'm looking for any rule which can check if sender address given in envelope
matches address given in header From: field.
Why? This isn't generally a useful rule, as mismatches are very common.
For example, this mailing list (or any other mailing list).. The From:
header will
Michael Grant wrote:
I noticed when I use spamassasin -r that it seems to add virtually
every email address inside the email to the auto-whitelist db with
high values (ie it's blacklisting them), even my own address, even
addresses in received header lines. This isn't what I expected, I
would
mouss wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 17:51 -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
Perhaps Verizon is screwing up their DNS?
Ahh, yes they are:
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1227
Hrm.
As a troubleshooting hack for this increasingly-common feature
According to the wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/MassCheck
mass-check lives in the masses of the source tarball. This was true for
SA 3.1.x and older, but 3.2.x no longer includes it.
It can still be grabbed SVN, or even the web interface to SVN, but the
wiki should point to the
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:07:43PM +, Justin Mason wrote:
The big question is, where do the devs think folks should go to get it?
from SVN directly, I guess.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/trunk/masses ...
Yes. The main idea was to
Justin Mason wrote:
quick survey:
Is anyone using mass-check without previously having SVN set up?
Is this turning out to be a major barrier?
Should we put mass-check back into the distro?
Good survey, although I highly doubt anyone is using it that wouldn't be
able to get it from SVN with
David Zinder wrote:
What should dig return? I too have Verizon fios. If /etc/resolve.conf
contains their DNS servers I get similar dig results as you. If I
change it to DNS servers I trust I get:
$ dig techweb.com.multi.surbl.org
; DiG 9.2.4 techweb.com.multi.surbl.org
;; global options:
Martin Gregorie wrote:
spamassassin --mbox mbox scanned.mbox
No, SA doesn't know how to split up messages for scanning; sa-learn
is the only SA component that can extract messages from an mbox mail
folder.
In that case, what does the --mbox option do? Not what I expected,
Matt Kettler wrote:
Martin Gregorie wrote:
spamassassin --mbox mbox scanned.mbox
No, SA doesn't know how to split up messages for scanning; sa-learn
is the only SA component that can extract messages from an mbox mail
folder.
In that case, what does the --mbox option do
201 - 300 of 3432 matches
Mail list logo
