Hi
So a spamassassin -D --lint for a first stab at debugging.
You don't mention how you are calling SA, so maybe there's file permission
issues?
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
-Original Message-
From: JP Kelly
Gene Heskett wrote on Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:27:48 -0500:
Now the one remaining error being logged for every session called is
this:
*Is your spamd running as non-root now?* Check with ps.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services:
Gene Heskett wrote on Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:15:27 -0500:
Where the he!! are the docs that explain this, I've been beating myself
half to death for at least a week on this.
There is a readme, there's man spamd, there's
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BetterDocumentation/SpamdReadme?highli
On Thursday 15 December 2005 16:50, Matt Kettler wrote:
Brian Kendig wrote:
On Dec 15, 2005, at 4:11 PM, Vivek Khera wrote:
On Dec 15, 2005, at 2:04 PM, Brian Kendig wrote:
I'm running spamd as spamd -d -x -u nobody, I've commented out
AWL from v310.pre, and I set bayes_auto_learn 0 so
Title: Message
Hi,
I'm not running a
mail server but just a annoyed receiver of spam.
It seems to me that
a lot of spam is send through mail servers disguised adifferent mail
server (possibly acknowledged as trustworthy)
I get to that
conclusion from reading the mailheader and comparing
On Friday 16 Dec 2005 10:30, Søren Therkelsen wrote:
Hi,
I'm not running a mail server but just a annoyed receiver of spam.
It seems to me that a lot of spam is send through mail servers
disguised a different mail server (possibly acknowledged as
trustworthy)
I get to that conclusion from
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:17:04 -0500:
Using greylisting you'd delay their mail, but they'd be able to deliver even if
they still are in the RBL if they retry after the greylist timer expires.
That makes only sense if you greylist *only* hosts on these
On Friday 16 December 2005 04:55, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Gene Heskett wrote on Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:27:48 -0500:
Now the one remaining error being logged for every session called
is this:
*Is your spamd running as non-root now?* Check with ps.
The children are, Kai. Which there seems to be only 2
On Friday 16 December 2005 04:55, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Gene Heskett wrote on Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:15:27 -0500:
Where the he!! are the docs that explain this, I've been beating
myself half to death for at least a week on this.
There is a readme, there's man spamd, there's
Søren Therkelsen wrote on Fri, 16 Dec 2005 11:30:10 +0100:
Received: from [218.65.120.230] (helo=uwo.ca)
--Why should a Canadian university have there
mail server in China?
Why not? The answer may be obvious in this case, but if you try to
generalize that this
I'm running Spamassassin via amavisd-new on my postfix MTA. I have
users that are using Verizon Aircards at times to connect and some of
those IPs are now starting to show up in RBLs, leaving them unable to
send email without it bouncing as spam. All users sending email
authenticate via SASL so
Patrick von der Hagen wrote on Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:02:24 +0100:
However, I'm usually told greylisting is great, but without
whitelisting you will have to many false-positives, eg. newsletter, etc..
If you use SPF-autowhitelisting and host-based autowhitelisting (in contrast
to using tuples)
David Hollis wrote:
I'm running Spamassassin via amavisd-new on my postfix MTA. I have
users that are using Verizon Aircards at times to connect and some of
those IPs are now starting to show up in RBLs, leaving them unable to
send email without it bouncing as spam. All users sending email
Just for the record, in case it helps anyone else - I found a
workaround to my problem.
The problem is that spamd 3.1.0 insists on trying to create per-user
config files in its user's home directory, even when I tell it not
to, and this causes errors if its user has no home directory. I
On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 13:13, David Hollis wrote:
I'm running Spamassassin via amavisd-new on my postfix MTA. I have
users that are using Verizon Aircards at times to connect and some of
those IPs are now starting to show up in RBLs, leaving them unable to
send email without it bouncing as
On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 09:28 -0500, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
David Hollis wrote:
I'm running Spamassassin via amavisd-new on my postfix MTA. I have
users that are using Verizon Aircards at times to connect and some of
those IPs are now starting to show up in RBLs, leaving them unable to
Did you see
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
as of today?
It may help you with root user_prefs problem if it is not related to the
user running spamd. I'm using only 2.64 spamd or 3.1 SA in combination
with mailscanner, so I don't know how the current spamd behaves in this
respect.
Kai
--
Kai
Scott Broderick wrote:
When using sa-learn like the following, will it learn server wide or just
for that user?
sa-learn --spam --mbox /home/virtual/removed.com/home/datona/mail/spam
Scott Broderick
It will learn for the current user running the sa-learn command.
-Jim
So this may sounds like a silly question but.
Does this mean that SA will only become affective and good at catching a
high percentage of spam IF sa-learn is run on all clients pop3 accounts?
How do the masses out there do it then? If you have over 1000 users on the
box (say 100 domains all
On Friday 16 December 2005 09:49, Brian Kendig wrote:
Just for the record, in case it helps anyone else - I found a
workaround to my problem.
The problem is that spamd 3.1.0 insists on trying to create per-user
config files in its user's home directory, even when I tell it not
to, and this causes
Scott Broderick wrote:
So this may sounds like a silly question but.
Does this mean that SA will only become affective and good at catching a
high percentage of spam IF sa-learn is run on all clients pop3 accounts?
How do the masses out there do it then? If you have over 1000 users on the
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:17:04 -0500:
Using greylisting you'd delay their mail, but they'd be able to deliver even
if
they still are in the RBL if they retry after the greylist timer expires.
That makes only sense if you greylist *only* hosts on
On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 09:28 -0500, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DynablockIssues
I believe there's a patch to add the required tokens to Postfix, but I
can't remember for sure where it is or who wrote it at the moment. The
name Erwin Hoffmann comes to mind
Hi,
spamassassin replace these kind of character by X in mail subject,
how can i correct this? (by specifing a charset?)
Thanks
Running SA 3.0.2
Does anyone know a cure for this error I am getting in my maillog files?
In the file: /etc/sysconfig/spamassassin
I have:
SPAMDOPTIONS=--max-conn-per-child=1 -d -c -m5 -H
Scott Broderick
On Friday 16 December 2005 14:05, Scott Broderick wrote:
Running SA 3.0.2
Does anyone know a cure for this error I am getting in my maillog
files? In the file: /etc/sysconfig/spamassassin
I have:
SPAMDOPTIONS=--max-conn-per-child=1 -d -c -m5 -H
Why just one session? The common usage is to
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
list-unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
List-Post: mailto:users@spamassassin.apache.org
List-Id: users.spamassassin.apache.org
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] stipulated:
Don't bother to try to report spam with that header placement if you
expect outfits that use DCC to respond. Placing the headers at the
bottom that way will screw up the DCC hash they can use to identify
the message details as truth.
AIUI,
so are you stating it would be better to set that to 50?
Scott Broderick
- Original Message -
From: Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: server hit by SIGCHLD
On Friday 16 December 2005 14:05, Scott
wrote on 16 Dec 2005 16:22:29 -:
what is the problem with putting a single computer into a hosting center,
name it mycompany.com,
and also let it helo as mycompany.com?
It's not considered an FQDN, it's a domain. Depending on how strict the helo
syntax test is it will
fail at this
On Friday 16 December 2005 16:50, Scott Broderick wrote:
so are you stating it would be better to set that to 50?
Or something in that area. Memory usage of a spamd process seems to
grow forever, and limiting the child process to 50 invocations seem to
control that rather nicely. After that
...
Hi,
what is the problem with putting a single computer into a hosting center, name
it mycompany.com,
and also let it helo as mycompany.com?
Of course it should have reasonable dns entries but that's a different story
Wolfgang Hamann
None. In the last year I have received valid
wrote on 16 Dec 2005 16:22:29 -:
what is the problem with putting a single computer into a hosting center,
name it mycompany.com,
and also let it helo as mycompany.com?
It's not considered an FQDN, it's a domain. Depending on how strict the helo
syntax test is it will
fail at this
33 matches
Mail list logo
