Hi!
pyzor -d ping
Mine says this, but I applied the 3 in 1 patch that I learned about in this
thread:
sending: 'User: anonymous\nTime: 1134325707\nSig:
177d0df77c0b91197da93b41c85c4f5f3d9b823b\n\nOp: ping\nThread: 31207\nPV:
2.0\n\n'
received: 'Thread: 31207\nCode: 200\nDiag: OK\nPV:
DAve wrote on Sun, 11 Dec 2005 20:41:55 -0500:
So the qmail server in question did not fail to
report the host name or IP, the mail admin failed to properly
configure his choosen mail server software.
I generally agree, that many mail servers are badly administered, but,
frankly, if a
I enabled the DomainKeys plugin way back, but didn't have much to play for
it. Now I'm subscribed to a group at yahoogroups.com and am getting mails
from Yahoo with:
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima;
d=yahoogroups.com; b=domain key here;
SA hits as:
DK_SIGNED Domain
Title: RE: A thought about phone numbers and URIBLs
-Original Message-
From: Craig McLean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 9:58 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: A thought about phone numbers and URIBLs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED
At 02:53 AM 12/12/2005, Its Azfar wrote:
1.
spamd[6203]: Couldn't create readable default_prefs
for [/n
onexistent/.spamassassin/user_prefs]
snip
If you are running spamd as root, it will try to setuid itself to the user
that calls spamc. However, if that user turns out to be root, spamd
...
DJB is generally of the opinion that if you do not know how to properly
configure your mail server, you should be hiring someone who does. So
no, his software generally does not work right out of the box.
opinion - not troll
Personally I have some rather harsh ideas about mail server
Paul R. Ganci wrote:
I am using DCC-1.3.23 to do greylisting (dccd greylisting server with
the dccm sendmail milter). As a result DCC checksums are performed prior
to the Spamassassin 3.1.0 scan. Therefore rather than repeat the DCC
checks in Spamassassin I have constructed a custom ruleset to
Hi All,
I used to have SA 3.1.0 working with the Spamcop and SBL-type checks
working just fine on my old mail-server (RH6, don't ask) but its
hardware died and I am now trying to get it reworking on a Fedora
Core 2 machine.
SA was downloaded and installed from CPAN and seems to work in almost
On 12/12/2005 01:31 pm, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
I enabled the DomainKeys plugin way back, but didn't have much to play for
it. Now I'm subscribed to a group at yahoogroups.com and am getting mails
from Yahoo with:
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima;
d=yahoogroups.com;
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
I enabled the DomainKeys plugin
...
Shouldn't it be able to verify the signature? Do I need to have an
additional Perl module or some local certificate store?
Yup, and it works for me. But Mail::DomainKeys changed their API and I had to
apply a patch.
See this blog
Pollywog wrote:
On 12/12/2005 01:31 pm, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
I enabled the DomainKeys plugin way back, but didn't have much to play for
it. Now I'm subscribed to a group at yahoogroups.com and am getting mails
from Yahoo with:
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima;
Jonathan Allen wrote:
Hi All,
I used to have SA 3.1.0 working with the Spamcop and SBL-type checks
working just fine on my old mail-server (RH6, don't ask) but its
hardware died and I am now trying to get it reworking on a Fedora
Core 2 machine.
Install the Net::DNS perl module.
Pretty
Matt Kettler wrote:
Jonathan Allen wrote:
I used to have SA 3.1.0 working with the Spamcop and SBL-type checks
working just fine on my old mail-server (RH6, don't ask) but its
hardware died and I am now trying to get it reworking on a Fedora
Core 2 machine.
Install the Net::DNS perl module.
Matt Kettler wrote:
Jonathan Allen wrote:
I used to have SA 3.1.0 working with the Spamcop and SBL-type checks
working just fine on my old mail-server (RH6, don't ask) but its
hardware died and I am now trying to get it reworking on a Fedora
Core 2 machine.
Install the Net::DNS perl
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
If you installed one of their RPMs I think that the
/etc/sysconfig/spamassassin config file will probably have included -L
in it, so if starting with their included rc script you'll only be using
local tests. If this is the case just remove the -L from that
On 12/12/2005 06:08 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
I enabled the DomainKeys plugin
...
Shouldn't it be able to verify the signature? Do I need to have an
additional Perl module or some local certificate store?
Yup, and it works for me. But Mail::DomainKeys changed
Pollywog wrote:
Can't locate Mail/DomainKeys/Message.pm in @INC
There's your problem... the DomainKeys plugin requires the Mail::DomainKeys
package. Install that, apply the patch to the plugin, and you should be
good-to-go.
--
Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902
Well, now to join Geocities and Tripod, we have Leo on AOL.
The URL, http://hometown.aol.com/assavralloWi/immerse.html redirects to
www.uditines.com, a fairly vanilla pill site (IP 61.31.214.81, listed
in SBL35716). Further redirection takes you to the landing page in a
subdirectory at:
On 12/12/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kai Schaetzl wrote: I enabled the DomainKeys plugin... Shouldn't it be able to verify the signature? Do I need to have an
additional Perl module or some local certificate store?Yup, and it works for me.But Mail::DomainKeys changed their API
wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 10:08:30 -0800:
Yup, and it works for me. But Mail::DomainKeys changed their API and I
had to apply a patch.
See this blog entry:
http://saintaardvarkthecarpeted.com/blog/?p=220
Thanks, I read the bugzilla and checked my version. I still have 0.18.
Seems
On 12/12/2005 06:36 pm, Pollywog wrote:
Same as before the patch. I am using Spamassassin 3.1.0a-1 from a Debian
Sarge package compiled and installed on a Xandros 3 system.
I think it is from Debian unstable not Sarge.
Yes, they call it unstable for a reason :)
8)
Bill Baird wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:56:02 -0500:
This link has more details about the patch -
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4623
Thanks, but the blog contains a link to the bugzilla, anyway :-)
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive
Kai Schaetzl wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:01:08 +0100:
Ok, patch run worked flawless. Now let's see if I get a different result
next time I get a mail from Yahoo.
Still getting message has an unverified signature. Hm?
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet
On 12/12/2005 07:58 pm, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Kai Schaetzl wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:01:08 +0100:
Ok, patch run worked flawless. Now let's see if I get a different result
next time I get a mail from Yahoo.
Still getting message has an unverified signature. Hm?
Perhaps something is broken
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I am new to spamassassin, quite old to *NIX administration. I am in the
process of testing spamassassin on my new server and replacing my current
home-brewed antispam measures with it.
I am a subscriber to MAPS DNSBL.
Question:
What are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kai Schaetzl writes:
Kai Schaetzl wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:01:08 +0100:
Ok, patch run worked flawless. Now let's see if I get a different result
next time I get a mail from Yahoo.
Still getting message has an unverified signature. Hm?
It's
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kai Schaetzl writes:
Kai Schaetzl wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:01:08 +0100:
Ok, patch run worked flawless. Now let's see if I get a different
result next time I get a mail from Yahoo.
Still getting message has an unverified signature. Hm?
It's pretty easy for
Jonathan Allen wrote:
Is there a debug mode that I could see ? Just typing
spamassassin -t spamemail | more
shows that those tests aren't cutting in.
Try adding a -D to that command line, you'll get general debugging, which should
report on the state of the DNS modules, if it
Pollywog wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:05:40 +:
Perhaps something is broken on the Yahoo side.
Don't think so. I used the two auto-responders at
http://www.elandsys.com/resources/sendmail/domainkeys.html
to try it. It shows the same as the Yahoo messages, so I suppose, there's
something on
Frank Bures wrote:
Hi,
I am new to spamassassin, quite old to *NIX administration. I am in the
process of testing spamassassin on my new server and replacing my current
home-brewed antispam measures with it.
I am a subscriber to MAPS DNSBL.
Question:
What are recommended scoring
wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 12:36:17 -0800:
0.0 DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME Domain Keys: policy says domain signs some mails
0.0 DK_POLICY_TESTING Domain Keys: policy says domain is testing DK
Yeah, this is what I got with the Yahoo mails as well. Haven't got in any
Yahoo mail since
Justin Mason wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 12:32:21 -0800:
If you want a post-mortem, it might be worth forwarding a full message
with all headers...
Well, just saving it from my mail program may have broken it. I understand
that it's a filigrane method, that's probably why it's bound to fail in
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Justin Mason wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 12:32:21 -0800:
If you want a post-mortem, it might be worth forwarding a full
message with all headers...
...
As you see all tests result in cannot load message using
Mail::DomainKeys::Message.
Do you have Mail::DomainKeys
Matt Kettler wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 16:13:21 -0500:
Others would say they trust it explicitly and would
immediately give it 10.0.
If I trust it I use it at MTA level. My opinion ;-)
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:48:28 -0800:
Do you have Mail::DomainKeys installed?
Yes. If the plugin is enabled, but Mail::DomainKeys is not installed you
get --lint warnings.
That is, does this command
print 1 or an error?
$ perl -e use Mail::DomainKeys::Message;
print 1;
Sure,
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 16:13:21 -0500:
Others would say they trust it explicitly and would
immediately give it 10.0.
If I trust it I use it at MTA level. My opinion ;-)
True, but depending on how you are set up, that may be an even further degree of
Pollywog wrote:
On 12/11/2005 05:31 pm, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Craig Zeigler wrote on Sun, 11 Dec 2005 11:11:15 -0500:
The filename is Part 1.1.jpg.
Use MailScanner or another tool to reject/delete mail with that name. If
it is coming from zombies, just disallow zombies at MTA level. Not
On 12/12/2005 09:13 pm, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Pollywog wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:05:40 +:
Perhaps something is broken on the Yahoo side.
Don't think so. I used the two auto-responders at
http://www.elandsys.com/resources/sendmail/domainkeys.html
to try it. It shows the same as the
Craig Zeigler wrote:
I have been getting hundreds of these messages per day and don't know
how to stop them. The bayes is only come back at 60%.
They are the messages advertising drugs with a random subject (yes, I
know, one of the many) The filename is Part 1.1.jpg. There is no virus
that I
Matt Kettler wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 17:12:50 -0500:
There's all different degrees of trust and more ways to go about it than we
can
count here :)
I think simpler. Either I trust it or not, so either I use it or not. :-)
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive
Pollywog wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:29:29 +:
I applied it to the DomainKeys.pm file... was that incorrect?
It will patch against this path:
lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/DomainKeys.pm
from the root of your source. If you installed it against the installed
.pm or against the devel package
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 17:12:50 -0500:
There's all different degrees of trust and more ways to go about it than we
can
count here :)
I think simpler. Either I trust it or not, so either I use it or not. :-)
Kai
Personally, I have yet to find a
On 12/12/2005 11:13 pm, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Pollywog wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:29:29 +:
I applied it to the DomainKeys.pm file... was that incorrect?
It will patch against this path:
lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/DomainKeys.pm
from the root of your source. If you installed it against
Pollywog wrote:
/usr/share/perl5/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/DomainKeys.pm
That is the file I patched and there were no errors.
Have you looked at the .pm file and verified that the new code is in place?
Do you run spamd? If so have you shut it down and started it up again?
--
On 12/13/2005 12:08 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pollywog wrote:
On 12/12/2005 11:50 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pollywog wrote:
/usr/share/perl5/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/DomainKeys.pm
That is the file I patched and there were no errors.
Have you looked at the .pm file and verified
Pollywog wrote:
perl -MMail::DomainKeys -e 'print $Mail::DomainKeys::VERSION'
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ perl -MMail::DomainKeys -e 'print
$Mail::DomainKeys::VERSION'
Can't locate Mail/DomainKeys.pm in @INC (@INC
contains: /etc/perl /usr/local/lib/perl/5.8.4
/usr/local/share/perl/5.8.4
It is time for some new drug-like rules for university degree.
{^_^}
...
Matt Kettler wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 16:13:21 -0500:
Others would say they trust it explicitly and would
immediately give it 10.0.
If I trust it I use it at MTA level. My opinion ;-)
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services:
Pollywog wrote on Tue, 13 Dec 2005 00:12:06 +:
It would seem that the problem is something other than the plugin, perhaps my
PERL installation.
No, it just seems that the early suggestion to install Mail::DomainKeys
confused
you. You have to install that Perl module *plus* the SA
I have one user who insists on seeing all mail sent to her. (OK, it's my
wife.)
I added all_spam_to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to local.cf and that makes it work
for her. However, if there are other recipients bcc'd on the the email,
then the all_spam_to negative score gets applied to the message and
On 12/13/2005 12:17 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pollywog wrote:
perl -MMail::DomainKeys -e 'print $Mail::DomainKeys::VERSION'
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ perl -MMail::DomainKeys -e 'print
$Mail::DomainKeys::VERSION'
Can't locate Mail/DomainKeys.pm in @INC (@INC
contains: /etc/perl
Steven Stern wrote:
I have one user who insists on seeing all mail sent to her. (OK, it's my
wife.)
I added all_spam_to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to local.cf and that makes it work
for her. However, if there are other recipients bcc'd on the the email,
then the all_spam_to negative score gets
Steven Stern wrote:
I have one user who insists on seeing all mail sent to her. (OK, it's my
wife.)
I added all_spam_to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to local.cf and that makes it work
for her. However, if there are other recipients bcc'd on the the email,
then the all_spam_to negative score gets
On 12/13/2005 12:31 am, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Pollywog wrote on Tue, 13 Dec 2005 00:12:06 +:
It would seem that the problem is something other than the plugin,
perhaps my PERL installation.
No, it just seems that the early suggestion to install Mail::DomainKeys
confused you. You have to
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 17:12:50 -0500:
There's all different degrees of trust and more ways to go about it than we
can
count here :)
I think simpler. Either I trust it or not, so either I use it or not. :-)
Kai
Personally, I have yet to find a
List Mail User wrote:
I don't know about that. I trust all the RFCI lists, but was
blasted (Hi Matt) for using postmaster at the MTA level (and don't any
more).
Who me? Surely not...
(pushes blast-o-matic 9000 further under desk with toe while looking innocent)
:)
List Mail User wrote:
Do you have any idea (or even better, measurements) of what the FP
rate would be if you 4xx'd it instead of 5xx'ing - i.e. how many of those
FPs are corrected before the MTA re-delivery timeout period (yes, I know
that many sites use less than the recommended 5
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Justin Mason) writes:
It's pretty easy for normal mail transmission to break DK
signatures
It sure is. Kai's and Pollywog's problems prompted me to investigate
why my own DK plugin was not verifying signatures from Yahoo! and
gmail.com. I filled SA's DomainKeys plugin and
Matt Kettler wrote:
Steven Stern wrote:
I have one user who insists on seeing all mail sent to her. (OK, it's my
wife.)
I added all_spam_to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to local.cf and that makes it work
for her. However, if there are other recipients bcc'd on the the email,
then the all_spam_to
Matt Kettler wrote:
Regex suggestion: the ^.* at the beginning is pointless. Why force-match the
start of a line, but allow any number of any character immediately following?
/bulk Body=/s will have the exact same matches, and do it faster with less
memory.
Good point.
For optimization
I want to make sure that razor,pyzor,dcc and bayes
learning is working or not. I dont know i have
installed these packages or not. ANy one help me
configuring these things on freebsd.
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
spamassassin -D --lint
Will give you a world of information about SpamAssassin.
HTH,
Mike
Its Azfar wrote:
I want to make sure that razor,pyzor,dcc and bayes
learning is working or not. I dont know i have
installed these packages or not. ANy one help me
configuring these things on freebsd.
Heute (13.12.2005/07:08 Uhr) schrieb M. Lewis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]),
spamassassin -D --lint
Will give you a world of information about SpamAssassin.
uuuh, too many information all at once. It`s better to use
spamassassin -D --lint 21 |more
HTH,
Mike
Its Azfar wrote:
I want to make sure
Now I am running spamd under spamd user but still
getting these errors.
Dec 13 06:36:19 mail spamd[13874]: connection from
localhost.webexs.com [127.0.0.1] at port 56043
Dec 13 06:36:19 mail spamd[13874]: Creating
default_prefs [/nonexistent/.spamassassin/user_prefs]
Dec 13 06:36:19 mail
64 matches
Mail list logo
