On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 03:51:28PM -0700, Bill Landry wrote:
Hmmm, where else could this configuration issue be, Theo, since none of my
CF files contain a - in the test definitions? Grep results:
Run spamassassin with -D, it'll tell you what files its reading. Could be
- Original Message -
From: Theo Van Dinter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Run spamassassin with -D, it'll tell you what files its reading. Could
be
/usr/share/spamassassin/*.cf, user_prefs, etc.
Okay, I created a test.cf file and added the following entries (with hyphens
-):
header
Ken Goods wrote:
I finally got SA 3.0 installed (by building from the tarball) along with
MailScanner 4.33.3 and ClamAV 0.80, but I am getting the following --lint
error keeping the URI checks from being performed. (Redhat 9.0)
debug: running uri tests; score so far=-3.174
Failed to compile URI
Ryan Moore scribbled on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:31 PM:
snip
SURBL support is included in SA3.0, delete surbl_uri.cf.
Ryan Moore
--
Perigee.net Corporation
704-849-8355 (sales)
704-849-8017 (tech)
www.perigee.net
You mean to tell me with all I went through today,
Can I respectfully ask why SA even looks at that file if it doesn't need it
anymore?
Ken
It'll read any *.cf file under /etc/mail/spamassassin, doesn't matter
what the filename itself is.
Ryan Moore
--
Perigee.net Corporation
704-849-8355 (sales)
704-849-8017 (tech)
www.perigee.net
Ryan Moore scribbled on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:48 PM:
Can I respectfully ask why SA even looks at that file if it doesn't
need it anymore?
Ken
It'll read any *.cf file under /etc/mail/spamassassin, doesn't matter
what the filename itself is.
Ryan Moore
--
Hello All,
I have a, possibly, easy question. I have SpamAssassin 2.64 with a ton
of the rules that you have at rules emporium, and man they work great, but
I am wanting to upgrade my Spamassassin from 2.64 to 3.0.0, the latest via
CPAN. I was wondering if during upgrade via CPAN if there was
On Sep 28, 2004, at 3:18 AM, John Andersen wrote:
On Monday 27 September 2004 09:22 pm, Christopher Jett wrote:
Just upgraded to 3.0 from 2.6.3. I don't see where SURBL is ever
registering a score, where previously it was scoring tons of mail.
How
can I verify that it is actually working? I
On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 11:50:02 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
Yes very true. We also would like to include JP in the next mass checks,
so we can see how scoring would look like in the current situation.
Yes, I believe Theo already added JP for scoring in 3.1.
Jeff C.
--
Jeff Chan
On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 11:44:28 AM, Chris Santerre wrote:
Our testing for FPs has gotten
extremely better over the past few weeks. New tools and such.
Better for the new records, but we seem to keep finding FPs in
the old ones. We keep trying to track them down, but need
better
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jay Hall wrote:
I am experiencing a problem with one of my rules that I
cannot seem to find.
I have the following rules defined.
rawbody __RAW_EXE_ATTACHMENT/filename=\.*\.exe\/i
rawbody __RAW_VBS_ATTACHMENT/filename=\.*\.exe\/i
rawbody __RAW_COM_ATTACHMENT
On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 3:31:22 PM, Nick Stephens wrote:
NS Raymond Dijkxhoorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) RD wrote today:
Do you have Net::DNS installed ? It looks to me you are not using RBL checks
at all?
I checked my perllocal.pod and saw no reference to NET::DNS on this box,
so I
On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 4:58:21 PM, Christopher Jett wrote:
Still not seeing any hits from SURBL. I do see hits from other RBL's.
[...]
Tons of spam like this, but no SURBL hits at all. I just verified that
my Net::DNS is up to date as well. I am at a loss to figure out why
What method are you connecting to your CygWin SpamD?
Perhaps the problem is not with SpamD, but with SpamC. I noticed that the
new SA3.0 doesn't always fill the incoming TCP for your SpamC calling
application buffer... I use 1024 byte buffers. This may be throwing
whichever SpamC you are using
At 07:37 PM 9/29/2004 -0500, SAtalk Mail User wrote:
I have a, possibly, easy question. I have SpamAssassin 2.64 with a ton
of the rules that you have at rules emporium, and man they work great, but
I am wanting to upgrade my Spamassassin from 2.64 to 3.0.0, the latest via
CPAN.
1) delete
I forgot to mention that the only thing unusual about my local.cf file
is that it rewrites the Subject header differently than the standard
installed local.cf file. This same problem is also repeatable with
either spamassassin, or spamc/spamd when using the --siteconfigpath
directive.
--
Yeah, double-checked that first thing. It's definitely installed and at
the latest rev.
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Matt Kettler wrote:
At 03:55 PM 9/29/2004 -0700, Andy Biddle wrote:
Okay, so I'm at a loss. I'm reasonably new to SpamAssassin and dealing
with spam filters in general, but I've
hello,
i have just upgraded to spamassassin-3.0.0 and run it on a linux platform.
i have the following problem when reporting spam using spamassassin -D -r,
towards the end of the output there is a delay (a few seconds) the i get:
debug: Razor2 is not available
SpamCop - report to
A.A.S Lottery Headquarters:
Customer Service
580 N. Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 85914
Euro - Afro Asian Sweepstake Lottery
an Affiliate of Foundmoney International
Arena Complex Km 18 Route de Rufisque
I.P.P Award Dept.
johannesburg, south africa.
Ref: EAASL/941OYI/03
Batch: 03/06/MA34
--
Ok,
OK - I think I have narrowed down what is happening with this, though I
don't know why. I have placed my local.cf file in a non-standard
directory and I am using the --siteconfigpath=path to point to that
directory (where my local.cf file and my own custom rules files are
located). For some
How does one handle this in a shared server environment where there are many
domains on a single server with ONE mail instance? Does one have to run
steps 2-3 for each domain before you can restart spamd?
John
-Original Message-
From: Erik Wickstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, John Fleming wrote:
I would say a simple daemon to tail -F the logfile (-F to cover
rotations, etc), and parse strings for the specific blocklist messages.
-Dan
- Original Message -
From: Ed Kasky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Monday,
I'm trying to start using Bayes and sa-learn for the first time, now
that Bayes supports SQL.
I run a smallish system (about 80 users spread over three domains).
The basic setup is Exim - SpamAssassin 3 - Exim - amavis - Exim -
delivery. (That is -- SA and amavis are Exim router-transport pipes;
Folks,
I'm running into a weird problem and I don't know what the cause is.
I'm running Qmail / Qmail-Scanner 1.22 / SA 2.63 / Clam AV 75.1
I have messages that all have the subject Mail delivery failed, which the
message scores a negative number by SA and is delivered.
The problem is,
I recently sent out a request for help regarding always getting
autolearn=unavailable messages. When I try to train it with sa-learn, I
get:
Use of inherited AUTOLOAD for non-method Digest::SHA1::sha1_hex() is
deprecated at
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.2/Mail/SpamAssassin/Bayes.pm line
When I run SA 3.0 from a command line, I get a message at the end of the SA
output file, (no report template found), you can see it below. I'm using
the following options to launch SA.
spamassassin -D -t mime.822 test.txt
Has something changed with SA 3.0 or is there something wrong with my
Hi, people, my first mail to the list, and I'm already asking for
something quite hard to me... Here it goes:
I want to set up a WBEL with SA 3.0, but with user preferences driven
by a Mysql database. Also, I want the MTA (PostFix) to run with SASL
authentication. I've found a good bunch of info
Matt Kettler scribbled on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 7:31 PM:
At 07:37 PM 9/29/2004 -0500, SAtalk Mail User wrote:
I have a, possibly, easy question. I have SpamAssassin 2.64 with a
ton of the rules that you have at rules emporium, and man they work
great, but I am wanting to upgrade my
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:34:28 -0700 Chip Paswater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey guys,
I was looking at the Bayes scores in 3.0 and had a couple of questions:
[...]
zombie voice
... the FAQ ... read the FAQ ...
/zombie voice
-- Bob
On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 07:47:35AM -0700, Andy Biddle wrote:
Use of inherited AUTOLOAD for non-method Digest::SHA1::sha1_hex() is
deprecated at
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.2/Mail/SpamAssassin/Bayes.pm line 983.
Learned from 0 message(s) (1 message(s) examined).
Can't locate
On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 01:42:51PM +0200, Maurice Lucas wrote:
OK - I think I have narrowed down what is happening with this, though I
don't know why. I have placed my local.cf file in a non-standard
directory and I am using the --siteconfigpath=path to point to that
directory (where my
Hey guys,
I was looking at the Bayes scores in 3.0 and had a couple of questions:
[...]
zombie voice
... the FAQ ... read the FAQ ...
/zombie voice
Great Bob, the FAQ says how the scores are generated, I surmised that.
But these questions aren't in the FAQ:
Does a human review
While I can see the advantage of keeping awl and prefs in a sql
database, I can't see an advantage to keeping bayes data in a sql db.
Can someone point out an advantage? Would there be any disadvantage in
keeping everything except bayese in sql?
--
Robin Lynn Frank
Director of Operations
We use SA+Postfix+SASL+Mysql+procmail for our system.
The SASL authentication doesn't have anything to do with SA. It simply
allows your smtpd to accept AUTH commands; so you can deal with those
problems separately.
Also bear in mind that if you rig postfix to use mysql tables for it's
The problem has been resolved. In case anyone else has this issue in the
future, the problem was a blank clear_report_template definition in my
local.cf. removing it allowed SA to retrieve the info from 10_misc.cf
correctly.
-Slava "Slava Madrit" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
9/30/2004 10:53:09 AM
On Thursday 30 September 2004 18:05, Robin Lynn Frank wrote:
While I can see the advantage of keeping awl and prefs in a sql
database, I can't see an advantage to keeping bayes data in a sql db.
Can someone point out an advantage? Would there be any disadvantage in
keeping everything except
On Thursday 30 September 2004 15:37, Daniel M. Drucker wrote:
I'm trying to start using Bayes and sa-learn for the first time, now
that Bayes supports SQL.
I run a smallish system (about 80 users spread over three domains).
The basic setup is Exim - SpamAssassin 3 - Exim - amavis - Exim -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Theo Van Dinter writes:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 01:42:51PM +0200, Maurice Lucas wrote:
OK - I think I have narrowed down what is happening with this, though I
don't know why. I have placed my local.cf file in a non-standard
directory and I
I've done a CPAN force install Digest::SHA1 and get the same issue...
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 07:47:35AM -0700, Andy Biddle wrote:
Use of inherited AUTOLOAD for non-method Digest::SHA1::sha1_hex() is
deprecated at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Theo Van Dinter writes:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 09:44:20AM -0700, Justin Mason wrote:
if the init.pre is never read from what you specify as --siteconfigpath,
that's a bug -- could you report it to the bugzilla?(however I'm
pretty certain
On Wed, 2004-09-29 at 14:47, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
In fact, I cannot see anything in the headers that leads me to believe that
SURBL is being used/enforced.
Do you have Net::DNS installed ? It looks to me you are not using RBL
checks at all?
And make sure you're running a recent
Hello,
I have trouble with SURBL and think that it is related to above error
But if I test the module with CPAN or with the following script it says that
i'm at 0.48.
(carefull i'm a complete perl newbie and a SA newbie)
#!/usr/bin/perl -T -w
use strict;
use Net::DNS;
print Net::DNS-version, \n;
ok, ok, my ponit wasn't exactly that, but I've managed to notice some
things, partly via Google.
My problem (or, to tell it better, the thing I didn't realize) was how
will SA get the username it is analizing mail for, since the vitual
users setting doesn't (at least to my knowledge) provide this
I couldn't find anyone who has done this already, so I did it myself -
anyone who needs this is welcome to use my solution/code. My solution
requires an IMAP server and bayes to be in mysql. It also requires
SquirrelMail. It also requires a /tmp directory. Since squirrelmail
requires a
I couldn't find anyone who has done this already, so I did it myself -
Nice work!
How does this interact with the use/nonuse of report_safe? It seems to
me that (with report_safe 1) you end up training bayes on the
encapsulation, or (with report_safe 0) you end up training it on the
reciprocal
So, I take it that no one is seeing these weird spamd delays but me? Rats.
Shane Hickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-09-29 14:11]:
Howdy all. I'm running version 3.0.0 on Gentoo Linux (using the
3.0.0-r1 ebuild). The machine is a dual P3/450 and it is also running
sendmail 8.12.11 and it handles
Daniel M. Drucker wrote:
I couldn't find anyone who has done this already, so I did it myself -
Nice work!
How does this interact with the use/nonuse of report_safe? It seems to
me that (with report_safe 1) you end up training bayes on the
encapsulation, or (with report_safe 0) you end up
I've noticed about at 10% decrease in spam since Florida started having
all those problems with tropical weather.
Anyone else notice this?
I'm not trying to bash Florida, just something I noticed in the logs.
It's amazing how much better
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 6:37 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: 'Spam Forensics: Reverse-Engineering Spammer Tactics'
My slides from the presentation I gave at Toorcon 2004, 'Spam
Forensics:
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:10:07 -0400
AltGrendel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've noticed about at 10% decrease in spam since Florida started
having all those problems with tropical weather.
Anyone else notice this?
I'm not trying to bash Florida, just something I noticed in the
logs.
I've
I actually block all incoming mail that claims to be from my domain. The only
problem is that I don't get copies of messages that I send to some lists, such
as this one.
But... as far as I'm concerned, if a mail server isn't listed as an MX for
somedomain.com, it should use somedomain.com in
On 29 Sep 2004, at 16:10, Jay Hall wrote:
I changed the rules as you suggested, but e-mails with exe attachments
are still not being marked as SPAM. However, others are. Following
are the headers from an e-mail sent with an exe attachment.
div class=JediThese are not the headers you are
Hi, about a week ago I upgraded to SA 3.0.0 from 2.64. I run spamd (with
options -d -c), and call spamc from my .procmailrc. SA is installed
systemwide (e.g., local.cf is in /etc/mail/spamassassin), but I
also have my own user_prefs file that I tweak.
I happen to get a fair amount of spam that
At 04:23 PM 9/30/2004, Arun Bhalla wrote:
Hi, about a week ago I upgraded to SA 3.0.0 from 2.64. I run spamd (with
options -d -c), and call spamc from my .procmailrc. SA is installed
systemwide (e.g., local.cf is in /etc/mail/spamassassin), but I
also have my own user_prefs file that I tweak.
On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 06:40:18PM -0600, Lucas Albers wrote:
Some options kick you in the face.
Such as -a for spamd which will prevent it from starting.
Ouch.
Is the list of deprecated options and directives in the UPGRADE
document definitive?
Here at Panix -- where we have a bunch of
At 05:01 AM Thursday, 9/30/2004, John Fleming wrote -=
- Original Message -
From: Ed Kasky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: Preferred DNSBL
Rejects Since Sunday 4:00 am via rbls:
spamcop: 65
maps rbl+: 154
My configuration is
Postfix 2.1.5 and SpamAssassin 3.0.0. We're using spamc as
acontent_filter in /etc/postfix/master.cf to call
spamd.
My understanding is
that the manual whitelist function in SA simply starts the message scoring at
-100. Is there a way to have spamc/spamd abort scoring
At 04:43 PM 9/30/2004, Ben Rosengart wrote:
we are pretty unhappy about the skimpy upgrade documentation
Hmm, true, but are you volunteering to help write better documentation?
(General principle in FOSS: If you don't like it, volunteer to help if
you're able.)
At least this time there is an
Well...
ver avg scan time
2.4x2.7 seconds
3.0 30.4 seconds
OH MY! Network test :)
Any longer and I might just be doing greylisting by accident. ;)
Chris Santerre
System Admin and SARE Ninja
http://www.rulesemporium.com
http://www.surbl.org
'It is not the strongest of the species
On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 05:04:35PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
At 04:43 PM 9/30/2004, Ben Rosengart wrote:
we are pretty unhappy about the skimpy upgrade documentation
Hmm, true, but are you volunteering to help write better documentation?
(General principle in FOSS: If you don't like it,
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 5:05 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: 2.6 - 3.0 migration questions
At 04:43 PM 9/30/2004, Ben Rosengart wrote:
we are pretty unhappy about the skimpy upgrade
At 04:54 PM 9/30/2004, Tan, William wrote:
My
understanding is that the manual whitelist function in SA simply starts
the message scoring at -100. Is there a way to have spamc/spamd
abort scoring a message if the sender is whitelisted? I'd think
that this would improve performance on these
-Original Message-
From: Will Yardley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 12:58 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: spoofed Received header
On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 12:50:04PM -0700, Nate Schindler wrote:
I actually block all incoming
At 05:11 PM 9/30/2004, Will Yardley wrote:
Side note - who came up with this horrible acronym (I can't bring myself
to repeat it), and can people stop using it already!
Given that it's been around for at least 6 years (I spotted it in a May
1998 post on usenet) I don't think FOSS is going
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 5:23 PM
To: Chris Santerre; Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail)
Subject: Re: scan times up!
At 05:10 PM 9/30/2004, Chris Santerre wrote:
Well...
ver avg scan time
2.4x2.7 seconds
3.0
Matt Kettler wrote:
Given that it's been around for at least 6 years (I spotted it in a May
1998 post on usenet) I don't think FOSS is going anywhere.
I liked OSS better, but then several companies decided offering
high-dollar licenses to their code made them open source software and
diluted
Nate Schindler wrote:
There are two From lines in an incoming message, mail from, and the
envelope from which is in the data portion.
Er, I think you're getting your terminology mixed up. Those are usually
considered to be the same thing (ie, the SMTP MAIL FROM: == envelope
sender). I think
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matt Kettler wrote:
| I liked OSS better, but then several companies decided offering
| high-dollar licenses to their code made them open source software and
| diluted any meaning that expression had.
Actually, I believe the Free in FOSS was motivated
Chris Santerre wrote:
Well...
ver avg scan time
2.4x2.7 seconds
3.0 30.4 seconds
OH MY! Network test :)
Any longer and I might just be doing greylisting by accident. ;)
My time is up a little since upgrading, but not that much. I also
upgraded the hardware on the machine though too,
Kris Deugau wrote:
Nate Schindler wrote:
I try to treat my e-mail address as if it were my personal phone
number. I don't sign up with many mailing lists for this reason...
but I love SpamAssassin, so I've made an exception. ;) Well, that,
and I wanted to track issues with v3.
...
Anyway,
70 matches
Mail list logo
