Re: Using SA to prevent bouncing spam?

Andreas Pettersson wrote: Ole Nomann Thomsen wrote: Performing callouts will probably cause it to emit strange noises and smoke. Why would it? It would generate the same amount of connect attempts to FC as it already does today, but the spam gets rejected instead of accepted

Re: Using SA to prevent bouncing spam?

Ole Nomann Thomsen wrote: Hi, in order to avoid bouncing spam back to the (almost certainly) faked sender-addresses, I thought I could use SA directly: Thanks for all your input. Using you replies, I managed to persuade the FC guys to start providing me with a complete list of valid FC

Re: Using SA to prevent bouncing spam?

[EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Monday 14 August 2006 01:44, Ole Nomann Thomsen wrote: Hi, in order to avoid bouncing spam back to the (almost certainly) faked sender-addresses, I thought I could use SA directly: Why would you bounce spam, with or without spamassassin? My original post wasn't clear: I

Re: Using SA to prevent bouncing spam?

Den 15.08.2006 kl. 12:01 skrev Andreas Pettersson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: While I don't really see why ldap isn't an option, even with an 99% load, callout might be the solution. However, I don't run qmail but here's how it works with exim

Using SA to prevent bouncing spam?

Hi, in order to avoid bouncing spam back to the (almost certainly) faked sender-addresses, I thought I could use SA directly: Suppose I configure it to substitute for the sender/reply-to in any spam? That way spam-generated bounces would be dumped. Unfortunately It doesn't seem possible: *

Re: Bayes filtering only runs about 70% of the time - SOLVED

Ole Nomann Thomsen wrote: Hi All. I was scanning my SA log-files, when i noticed that about 30% of the result: -lines do not contain any BAYES_* score. Version info: SpamAssassin version 3.1.0 running on Perl version 5.8.4 on Debian and Redhat Linux The explanation was two-fold

Could you scan your logs for me?

Hi, can I ask a small favor from some of you running SA with Bayes enabled: Please run the following perl-oneliner on your SA-log (mine is current): perl -ne 'if (/result:/) {$n++; $b++ if (/BAYES/);} } print $b/$n,\n; {' current (I promise it's not a rootkit :-) I get: 0.710109622411693 I

Re: Could you scan your logs for me?

Thanks Matt, Ed, Ruben, Nicklas, Patrick, jdow, Chis et.al. for all the replies, you can stop sending them now, unless you get far below one. At least I now know for sure that I'm stumped :-) For the record: I have no bayes_ignore anywhere, and I don't believe I have missed something in my

Re: Bayes filtering only runs about 70% of the time

jdow wrote: From: Ole Nomann Thomsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi All. I was scanning my SA log-files, when i noticed that about 30% of the result: -lines do not contain any BAYES_* score. I suspect that about 30% of your users have an untrained Bayes database. Thanks, but no: All are scanned

Bayes filtering only runs about 70% of the time

Hi All. I was scanning my SA log-files, when i noticed that about 30% of the result: -lines do not contain any BAYES_* score. Version info: SpamAssassin version 3.1.0 running on Perl version 5.8.4 on Debian and Redhat Linux Delving deeper, I added this to my user_prefs: add_header all

Bayes locking

Hi, I've configured this: bayes_learn_to_journal 1 bayes_auto_expire 0 bayes_journal_max_size 0 I assumed that this would cause any bayes-learning to land in the bayes_journal file, only to be incorporated in the main bayes files whenever I ran sa-learn --sync. Thus keeping bayes_toks,

Bayes not run

Hi, I often see that bayes is not run on all the SA input. About 2 in 5 spam just has Bayes not run in the _BAYES_ headerlines, and no Bayes_XX score. What could cause bayes to skip? Too high a load? Too many locks on the bayes-files? I can't find anything in the logfiles.

info: prefork: child states: ...

Hi, SA 3.1.0 has some new lines in the log, like this: info: prefork: child states: BBBIBBIBB Does anybody know what they mean?

Re: HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR matches wrongly on hotmail

Justin Mason wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matt Kettler writes: At 09:23 AM 1/28/2005, Tony Finch wrote: Hi, it seems that HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR fires wrongly on this header: Received: from bay22-dav1.bay22.hotmail.com[64.4.16.181]:30781 (EHLO

HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR matches wrongly on hotmail

Hi, it seems that HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR fires wrongly on this header: Received: from bay22-dav1.bay22.hotmail.com[64.4.16.181]:30781 (EHLO hotmail.com) by mailgateway.sitc.dk ([195.231.241.98]:25) (F-Secure Anti-Virus for Internet Mail 6.41.149 Release) with SMTP; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 19:41:14