Today for the 1st time on my mail server I attempted to manually run
the 'sa-update' command in the shell and got the following:
[r...@mail ~]# sa-update
defined(%hash) is deprecated at
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Mail/SpamAssassin/Dns.pm line 757.
(Maybe you should just omit the
I noticed when reviewing headers today that there was a section for
'autolearn=no' and was wondering what exactly does this mean and
wouldn't autolearn be a good thing? I use Amavisd-new which calls out
to SpamAssassin modules but I don't have the spamd daemon running
physically. The Amavisd-new
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
bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam -3.0
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Kaleb Hosie kho...@spectraaluminum.com wrote:
Another (more automated way) is to use the following command:
spamassassin -r the_spam_message_file
Thanks for that info! I think the 'automated' suggestion sounds very
nice! When I submit it using 'SA' command,
I am wondering how I can report spam to Spamhaus Spamcop sites if it
hasn't already been reported? I started to get massive spam from one
particular IP as shown below:
Apr 20 09:30:45 mail postgrey[2219]: action=greylist, reason=new,
client_name=hst1pilot.com, client_address=188.72.217.47,
On my Postfix server, when my co-workers VPN from their laptops from
home, they then send mail via Outlook and their ISP IP address. When
the message gets to it's recipient, it's marked ***SPAM*** by SA.
User's are complaining that email from internal users are being marked
as 'spam' and they
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Michael Scheidell
scheid...@secnap.net wrote:
are they not authenticating through, and sending out via (forgive me) an
exchange server?
if outlook is authenticating direct to the exchange server, then the
exchange server would be the source ip, and you would
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Michael Scheidell scheid...@secnap.net wrote:
then read this part if I somehow confused you.
On 4/12/10 12:55 PM, Carlos Mennens wrote:
other option is set up submit port that only available via vpn, or use
smtp
auth and give anyone coming in via
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Warren Togami wtog...@gmail.com wrote:
[r...@mail ~]# rpm -qa spamassassin
spamassassin-3.3.1-3.el5.rf
What is rf?
I have no idea.
This isn't the first complaint about the rf RPM.
http://wtogami.livejournal.com/34108.html
Please don't use that repository.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Charles Gregory cgreg...@hwcn.org wrote:
But if anyone is running CentOS and runs yum manually, be warned that SA
3.3.1 will come in on the next update and you will have to run sa-update
manually as soon as it is installed.
Upgraded today as show below and had
/12/10, Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 14:28 -0500, Carlos Mennens wrote:
I guess I am still lost. SA appears to be working and everything looks
fine however my emails don't appear to be getting a score and I don't
understand how that link applies to why SA
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Martin Gregorie mar...@gregorie.org wrote:
They'd normally be in local.cf and are needed for any of the URIBL etc
blacklists to work correctly. See:
http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.2.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#network_test_options
I guess I am
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Martin Gregorie mar...@gregorie.org wrote:
Post the entire message to pastebin or a similar site and send the URL
here together with your explanation of what happened so we have
something to work with.
I am sorry I didn't post enough data.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Martin Gregorie mar...@gregorie.org wrote:
That 'male enhancement junk' advert may well contain something that
could be the basis of an additional rule - don't omit *anything* in
future, at least until you understand how to write custom rules.
Spammers often
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Jari Fredriksson ja...@iki.fi wrote:
You still posted not enough data. There is only the headers the link.
Here is the entire message:
http://pastebin.com/MtXWXdvc
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Jari Fredriksson ja...@iki.fi wrote:
That is hard. Only one URL in the body.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Martin Gregorie mar...@gregorie.org wrote:
You certainly changed the required score: the default is 5.0. The
standard rule scores are set on that basis. Mine are:
required_score 6.0
rewrite_header subject SPAM:
report_safe 1
use_bayes
OK so today I got my 1st spam email from someone at a yahoo.com email
address. Basically SA didn't score it at all and 'Postgray' did it's
job. Below are the headers from SA:
X-spam-checker-version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 (2010-01-18) on mail.iamghost.com
X-spam-level:
X-spam-status: No, score=0.0
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, greater than max
message size
19 matches
Mail list logo
