plugin: eval failed: bayes: Redis failed

Hello, I install Redis vía yum in Centos 7 and through cpan the Mail plugin :: SpamAssassin :: BayesStore :: Redis. In local.cf add this rule: bayes_store_module Mail::SpamAssassin::BayesStore::Redis bayes_sql_dsn server=0.0.0.0:6379,database=0 In redis.conf: port 6379 pidfile

Re: [OT] Re: Check for valid MX of sender and rspamd testing

Microsoft should be blacklisted globally, until they fix their own software. On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 16:00, Sebastian Arcus wrote: > Hence why I have to have a local whitelist and skip verification for all MX's > of the form *.outlook.com (which include Microsoft cloud

Re: plugin: eval failed: bayes: Redis failed

On 04/10/2018 06:23 AM, Emanuel Gonzalez wrote: Hello, I install Redis vía yum in Centos 7 and through cpan the Mail plugin :: SpamAssassin :: BayesStore :: Redis. In local.cf add this rule: bayes_store_module  Mail::SpamAssassin::BayesStore::Redis bayes_sql_dsn 

[OT] Re: Check for valid MX of sender and rspamd testing

On 10/04/18 08:41, Daniele Duca wrote: On 09/04/2018 20:40, Sebastian Arcus wrote: This might not really answer your question, but I've had really good results leaving all this to the MTA (Exim in my case). I actually go for the whole hog full callout verification - checking with the MX

Re: The "goo.gl" shortner is OUT OF CONTROL (+ invaluement's response)

2018-04-03 10:27 GMT-03:00 Leandro : > Hey guys. We just created an URL signature algorithm to be able to query > an entire URL at our URIBL: > > https://spfbl.net/en/uribl/ > > Now we are able to blacklist any malicious shortener URL. Now I will think > about some public

Re: bayes: cannot open bayes databases lock failed: File exists

On 09.04.18 16:09, Emanuel Gonzalez wrote: Hello, thanks for the reply. I use one database bayes for all email accounts (not sites, sorry for the error) how? amavis? bayes_expiry_max_db_size 15 bayes_learn_to_journal 1 bayes_auto_learn 0 this means you need to train manually 2- why

Re: [OT] Re: Check for valid MX of sender and rspamd testing

Microsoft shits on your head, and you pay for it. Go on, enjoy it. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 17:19, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 10.04.2018 um 17:17 schrieb Rupert Gallagher: > Microsoft should be > blacklisted globally, until they fix their >

Re: low score on very spammy email

On 04/10/2018 02:13 PM, Motty Cruz wrote: tons of spam fed to my spam-filter and yet very spammy emails get low score. zcat /var/virusmails/spam-G71jMeOxz-Ha.gz | less Return-Path: <> Delivered-To: spam-quarantine X-Envelope-From: X-Envelope-To:

low score on very spammy email

tons of spam fed to my spam-filter and yet very spammy emails get low score. zcat /var/virusmails/spam-G71jMeOxz-Ha.gz | less Return-Path: <> Delivered-To: spam-quarantine X-Envelope-From: X-Envelope-To: X-Envelope-To-Blocked:

Re: [OT] Re: Check for valid MX of sender and rspamd testing

>Microsoft should be blacklisted globally, until they fix their own software.  They even change the order of many headers (Receiveds included) remove the ones they do not like, etc... i am sure they like playing dices... PedroD

Re: low score on very spammy email

Thank you very much for your suggestions David. MTA is configured to use RBLs, reject_rbl_client b.barracudacentral.org worked really well for me at one point. Also, reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org, reject_rbl_client cbl.abuseat.org, reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,

Re: low score on very spammy email

On 04/10/2018 05:28 PM, Motty Cruz wrote: Thank you very much for your suggestions David. MTA is configured to use RBLs, reject_rbl_client b.barracudacentral.org worked really well for me at one point. Also, reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org, reject_rbl_client cbl.abuseat.org,  

Re: [OT] Re: Check for valid MX of sender and rspamd testing

On Tue, 10 Apr 2018, Rupert Gallagher wrote: Microsoft shits on your head, and you pay for it. Go on, enjoy it. On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 17:19, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 10.04.2018 um 17:17 schrieb Rupert Gallagher: > Microsoft should be blacklisted globally, until they

Re: low score on very spammy email

2018-04-10 18:52 GMT-03:00 David Jones : > On 04/10/2018 04:47 PM, Leandro wrote: > >> 2018-04-10 17:49 GMT-03:00 Motty Cruz motty.c...@gmail.com>>: >> >> I apologize here is the email headers and body >> >> https://pastebin.com/bgXrfKaQ >> >> >> >>

Re: low score on very spammy email

On 04/10/2018 05:04 PM, Leandro wrote: 2018-04-10 18:52 GMT-03:00 David Jones >: On 04/10/2018 04:47 PM, Leandro wrote: 2018-04-10 17:49 GMT-03:00 Motty Cruz

Re: low score on very spammy email

On 04/10/2018 03:49 PM, Motty Cruz wrote: I apologize here is the email headers and body https://pastebin.com/bgXrfKaQ Thanks, Content analysis details: (16.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description --

Re: low score on very spammy email

Thanks for your prompt reply: https://pastebin.com/bLy3Jcqt Apr 10 11:51:44 vm1 postfix/qmgr[791]: 723EC1A1706: from=, size=16883, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Apr 10 11:51:46 vm1 amavis[1395]: (01395-01) Passed CLEAN {RelayedInbound}, [127.0.0.1]

Re: low score on very spammy email

Thanks for you help! I'm trying to figure out why this email "get very low" score. Yes, Amavisd didn't stop it. I understand that, it is not part of the question here. I fed a lot of similar emails "learn spam" and still get very low score. It too thought it was permissions issues. On

Re: low score on very spammy email

Thanks for your help David, https://pastebin.com/wsYRfM8K -Motty On 04/10/2018 01:22 PM, David Jones wrote: On 04/10/2018 03:05 PM, Motty Cruz wrote: Thanks for your prompt reply: https://pastebin.com/bLy3Jcqt The Bayes setup looks good.  Can you put a lightly redacted version of that

Re: low score on very spammy email

On 04/10/2018 03:05 PM, Motty Cruz wrote: Thanks for your prompt reply: https://pastebin.com/bLy3Jcqt The Bayes setup looks good. Can you put a lightly redacted version of that email on pastbin.com so we can run it through our SA instances? Amavis should have blocked that message based

Re: low score on very spammy email

On 04/10/2018 03:34 PM, Motty Cruz wrote: Thanks for your help David, https://pastebin.com/wsYRfM8K That email is missing a lot of headers that are critical. Please post the entire email including the Received: headers. -Motty On 04/10/2018 01:22 PM, David Jones wrote: On 04/10/2018

Re: low score on very spammy email

I apologize here is the email headers and body https://pastebin.com/bgXrfKaQ Thanks, On 04/10/2018 01:40 PM, David Jones wrote: On 04/10/2018 03:34 PM, Motty Cruz wrote: Thanks for your help David, https://pastebin.com/wsYRfM8K That email is missing a lot of headers that are critical. 

Re: low score on very spammy email

2018-04-10 17:49 GMT-03:00 Motty Cruz : > I apologize here is the email headers and body > > https://pastebin.com/bgXrfKaQ You should not take this domain mrface.com seriously because it is a TLD used for free dynamic IP service (changeip.com). There is even a fake

Re: low score on very spammy email

On 04/10/2018 04:47 PM, Leandro wrote: 2018-04-10 17:49 GMT-03:00 Motty Cruz >: I apologize here is the email headers and body https://pastebin.com/bgXrfKaQ You should not take this domain mrface.com seriously

Re: low score on very spammy email

> Motty Cruz kirjoitti 10.4.2018 kello 23.49: > > I apologize here is the email headers and body > > https://pastebin.com/bgXrfKaQ > > Thanks, > > Oh my. X-Spam-Report: * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.]

Re: Check for valid MX of sender and rspamd testing

On 09/04/2018 20:40, Sebastian Arcus wrote: This might not really answer your question, but I've had really good results leaving all this to the MTA (Exim in my case). I actually go for the whole hog full callout verification - checking with the MX that the sender really exists. I know that