Re: [AMaViS-user] Spam-handling email only for selected users
Sven, If I knew how much confusion the semantics of bypass_* vs. *_lovers is causing, I would have provide only _lovers, and derive bypass_ automatically from it. Perhaps some day... what if on a big mail server hosting many users some don't want spam checking at all, As long as the effects of spam checking for such recipients are not visible (e.g. in headers or in paying the cost of additional service), they wouldn't know the difference nor care. This is why I'm saying that bypass* could in principle be derived from *lovers. The bypass* is just an optimization mechanism. but some want spam checking but no action taken based on the result of spam checking, If there is no effect, then it is irrelevant whether a mail was checked or not (except for wasted time). and some others don't want to receive mails which are definitely spam (e.g. the spam score is over a certain threshold)?? I think this is where the differentiation between bypass_* and *_lovers comes in very handy, or is there another way of doing this?? Yes it comes handy at times, which is why it was introduced. But the only useful reason that I can think of in setting bypass=1 and lovers kept at FALSE for a recipient is connected with cost. It is saying: I don't want to be billed for virus/spam filtering, but I don't mind if you block a virus or high score spam as long as I don't have to pay for this service (free ride on already performed checks on behalf of other recipients). bypass lover 0 0 useful, check and block malware 0 1 useful, check but deliver tagged 1 0 not too useful, free riding 1 1 useful, no checks if possible, and no effects Mark --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
[AMaViS-user] No spam info headers
I have the following in my /etc/amavisd.conf: $sa_tag_level_deflt = -300.0; because I want all mail to have the spamassassin info headers. But not all mails come with them. Why not? I'm not getting anything useful from the logs, even at loglevel 5. Thanks Hans --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] No spam info headers
Hans, I have the following in my /etc/amavisd.conf: $sa_tag_level_deflt = -300.0; because I want all mail to have the spamassassin info headers. But not all mails come with them. Why not? I'm not getting anything useful from the logs, even at loglevel 5. Make sure the recipient's domain matches the @local_domains_maps (and make sure the score was not below -300.0, which may happen if you have any whitelisting rules in SpamAssassin). Mark --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] LDAP amavisBypassBannedChecks not working
Mark Martinec wrote: Joel, Later on, because you have $banned_namepath_re nonempty, it overruled the earlier decision: due to the fact that when using the $banned_namepath_re the optimization was not done as it could have been. Not nice, but not incorrect. Thanks for the explanation, I'm glad somebody knows the big picture because I sure don't :-) I'm about to wrap up the 2.3.3 and I have prepared the following patch to fix the issue you stumbled across. The fix should ensure the banned check is not performed if all recipients agree it is not needed, even in the presence of $banned_namepath_re. You may want to try it out, or wait few days for a 2.3.3-pre or -rc. Thanks Mark. I've been running with the patch for a few days, everything looks good. Mark --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/ -- Joel Nimety Perimeter Internetworking Corp. 203.541.3416 --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
[AMaViS-user] is it possible with amamvis or spamassassin
i would like to set a rule that if the domain in to: is @acedsl.com and the user is not me to consider it spam, is this possible? Reply-To: --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
[AMaViS-user] best method to resolve hole in spam filter.
I'm using amavis-new-2.3.0, spamassassin 3.0.4 with postfix 2.1.5 Recently we've been experiencing a few messages slipping through. They clam the from address of an invalid user within the local domain. Thus amavis doesn't scan the message. Does anyone have suggestions on how best to prevent this from happening? Thanks Ross Anderson Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from murder ([unix socket]) by newmail (Cyrus v2.2.12-Gentoo) with LMTPA; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:44:54 -0500 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.owbn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 053D290CD1B8; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:44:54 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mail.owbn.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ns1.owbn.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 24214-01-5; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:44:53 -0500 (CDT) Received: from 158.238.39-62.rev.gaoland.net (158.238.39-62.rev.gaoland.net [62.39.238.158]) by mail.owbn.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1B6B690CD1B4; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:44:50 -0500 (CDT) Received: from PXFRJ-GP42 (62.39.238.158) by 62.39.238.158; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:41:59 -0500 From: Blount Tisha [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Vi.agra: Obsolete / C1alis: Le Weekend (Lasts up to 48 hours) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:41:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=WBHDQ.AAPUS.9-091987332-6724916197=:39695 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1437 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at owbn.org --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] Spam-handling email only for selected users
Sven wrote: Hi Mark, thanks for your reply, On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 12:16:53PM +0200, Mark Martinec told us: As long as the effects of spam checking for such recipients are not visible (e.g. in headers or in paying the cost of additional service), they wouldn't know the difference nor care. This is why I'm saying that bypass* could in principle be derived from *lovers. The bypass* is just an optimization mechanism. If there is no effect, then it is irrelevant whether a mail was checked or not (except for wasted time). that is what I meant: see this from the point of the person(s) running a busy mail server. With respect to spam scanning there are three kind of people: 1. People who want spam scanning and want the spam to be discarded/ quarantined/whatever. bypass lover 0 0 useful, check and block malware 2. People who want spam scanning but who want to receive all mails to act based on the spam scanning headers, e.g. in their MUA (those would be the ones for spam_lovers). Those people probably also want to define a threshold for marking mail as spam so they can filter on the X-Spam-Status: Yes header. bypass lover 0 1 useful, check but deliver tagged 3. People who want no spam scanning and don't want to pay for it. Those people can be put in bypass_spam_checks, no work will be wasted in spam scanning their mail, thus more resources on your mail server for scanning other people's mails. bypass lover 1 1 useful, no checks if possible, and no effects You have not mentioned a use for the fourth scenario which is the one that could no longer be configured if the change were made. bypass lover 1 0 not too useful, free riding Sven If I knew how much confusion the semantics of bypass_* vs. *_lovers is causing, I would have provide only _lovers, and derive bypass_ automatically from it. Perhaps some day... Mark, are you saying you want to automatically assign all *lovers to bypass*? Then how would you accomplish this?: bypass lover 0 1 useful, check but deliver tagged I don't find it confusing. I'm would favor flexibility. At first, I did not understand what *lovers did exactly. Bypass seemed obvious. I think that a note that including a recipient in a @*_lovers_maps is functionally equivalent to setting $final_*_destiny = D_PASS; for that recipient helps explain it (at least is does for me). I think it would be more confusing if you told people, If you want to bypass spam checks for a recipient, put then in a spam_lovers map. I think that you can only do something like: @spam_lovers_maps = @bypass_spam_checks_maps; (or) @bypass_spam_checks_maps = @spam_lovers_maps; under certain circumstances, not all. I think a note explaining under which circumstances these could be used would be appropriate. Gary V --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] best method to resolve hole in spam filter.
Should have added this. I can find no listing of [EMAIL PROTECTED] or @owbn.org in any white list yet it passes it as if localdomain to localdomain isn't being processed. current:Aug 12 10:44:53 [amavis] (24214-01-5) LMTP::10024 /var/lib/amavis/tmp/amavis-20050812T104038-24214: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: SIZE=21415 from mail.owbn.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ns1.owbn.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 24214-01-5; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:44:53 -0500 (CDT) current:Aug 12 10:44:53 [amavis] (24214-01-5) Checking: [62.39.238.158] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] current:Aug 12 10:44:53 [amavis] (24214-01-5) wbl: whitelisted sender [EMAIL PROTECTED] current:Aug 12 10:44:54 [amavis] (24214-01-5) FWD via SMTP: [127.0.0.1]:10025 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] current:Aug 12 10:44:54 [amavis] (24214-01-5) Passed CLEAN, [62.39.238.158] [62.39.238.158] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED], Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hits: -, 537 ms Bowie Bailey wrote: From: Ross Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm using amavis-new-2.3.0, spamassassin 3.0.4 with postfix 2.1.5 Recently we've been experiencing a few messages slipping through. They clam the from address of an invalid user within the local domain. Thus amavis doesn't scan the message. Does anyone have suggestions on how best to prevent this from happening? Thanks [snip] X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at owbn.org Looks like it's being scanned to me. What makes you think Amavis is not scanning it? The more likely explanation is that SpamAssassin is just not catching these particular spams. The From address should not make a difference as it is generally assumed to be unreliable. Bowie --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/ --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] Spam-handling email only for selected users
Gary wrote: If I knew how much confusion the semantics of bypass_* vs. *_lovers is causing, I would have provide only _lovers, and derive bypass_ automatically from it. Perhaps some day... Mark, are you saying you want to automatically assign all *lovers to bypass*? Then how would you accomplish this?: bypass lover 0 1 useful, check but deliver tagged Am I correct to say that this also would no longer be possible?: @spam_lovers_maps = (1); @bypass_spam_checks_maps = ( [ qw( [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] .example2.com ) ],); I just not getting how this idea could work in all cases. Gary V --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
[AMaViS-user] mailman/amavis and spamassassin
I am finding quarantined emails to non-local users who are members of a local mailman list using amavisd-new 2.3.2, postfix and spamassassin. The quarantined email shows the X-Spam headers, even though the final recipients are non-local. The policy for the list domain is Wants all spam (spam_lover = Y, set in mysql) and that seems to be borne out by the headers in the quarantined email: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at groovysecurity.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=6.559 tagged_above=-999 required=999 tests=[AWL=-6.896, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE=0.374, DNS_FROM_RFC_POST=1.376, HTML_90_100=10, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MSGID_FROM_MTA_ID=1.704] X-Spam-Level: ** I'm assuming it's putting the header into the email because the list domain is in local_domains. But the quarantine policy is apparently then not followed, because it is then quarantined for all the actual recipients on the list How do I set up mailman to go ahead and send it out? Even better, since the lists are set up for allowing post only from subscribers, I shouldn't be bothering with mail to the list. I could set up the domain for bypass_spam_checks, but would that work? (The message was NOT spam, it was from a member of the list). basically, how best to set up amavis/mailman ? --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
UPDATED: [AMaViS-user] mailman/amavis and spamassassin
In a process of deep contemplation, Justin B. Alcorn carefully constucted the following missive on 8/12/2005 12:03 PM: I am finding quarantined emails to non-local users who are members of a local mailman list using amavisd-new 2.3.2, postfix and spamassassin. The quarantined email shows the X-Spam headers, even though the final recipients are non-local. The policy for the list domain is Wants all spam (spam_lover = Y, set in mysql) and that seems to be borne out by the headers in the quarantined email: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at groovysecurity.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=6.559 tagged_above=-999 required=999 tests=[AWL=-6.896, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE=0.374, DNS_FROM_RFC_POST=1.376, HTML_90_100=10, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MSGID_FROM_MTA_ID=1.704] X-Spam-Level: ** I'm assuming it's putting the header into the email because the list domain is in local_domains. But the quarantine policy is apparently then not followed, because it is then quarantined for all the actual recipients on the list How do I set up mailman to go ahead and send it out? Even better, since the lists are set up for allowing post only from subscribers, I shouldn't be bothering with mail to the list. I could set up the domain for bypass_spam_checks, but would that work? (The message was NOT spam, it was from a member of the list). basically, how best to set up amavis/mailman ? OK, this is odd. I was looking over the quarantined message and realized that there was a SECOND SET of headers: X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=7.298 tag=-999 tag2=5 kill=6.9 tests=[AWL=-4.407, HTML_90_100=10, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MSGID_FROM_MTA_ID=1.704] X-Spam-Score: 7.298 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Flag: YES Those are the default values. Note that at least one of the subscribers to the mailing list _IS_ local - maybe that is causing the issue? --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] best method to resolve hole in spam filter.
Ross, Should have added this. I can find no listing of [EMAIL PROTECTED] or @owbn.org in any white list yet it passes it as if localdomain to localdomain isn't being processed. (24214-01-5) wbl: whitelisted sender [EMAIL PROTECTED] The sender somehow got matched in your whitelist. This is not the case by default, so it must come from your setup. At log level 5 you can check how lookups are performed prior to the wbl: whitelisted sender log entry. Mark --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] Spam-handling email only for selected users
Gary, I think we agree that it is a good idea that if a recipient is in a bypass* table, that same recipient should be in the corresponding *lovers table. The reverse of course only applies in some cases and limits the flexibility of the *lovers table. Exactly. Mark --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] Turn off the annoying razor log?
BTW, do you have 'lock_method flock' enabled? In postfix and dovecot I do, but not in the spamassassin config file ... should I? :) -Matt You decide, it can make a big difference in the speed that the Bayes database is written to or read from: http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.0.x/dist/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.h tml#miscellaneous_options Or better yet, move Bayes to SQL and the lock_method only still controls the AWL. Use flock by all means. Mark --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] Turn off the annoying razor log?
You decide, it can make a big difference in the speed that the Bayes database is written to or read from: http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.0.x/dist/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#miscellaneous_options Is the Bayesian database on by default? If so, doesn't it require training? --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] is it possible with amamvis or spamassassin
boricua wrote: i would like to set a rule that if the domain in to: is @acedsl.com and the user is not me to consider it spam, is this possible? I don't know why you would want to do that, mainly because I'm not sure you are aware of the potential problems. If you are the envelope recipient - someone BCC's you - and there is [EMAIL PROTECTED] on the To: line, this will get marked as spam. Are you really sure you want to do that? Legitimate mail does not always have to have your address on the To: line. I often BCC mail to 30 or so people at a time, with only one recipient on the To: line. in local.cf: header TO_ACEDSLTo =~/acedsl\.com/i describe TO_ACEDSL To someone in the acedsl.com domain score TO_ACEDSL 10.0 header TO_BORICUATo =~/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/i describe TO_BORICUA To boricua at acedsl.com score TO_BORICUA -10.0 Score will be 0 if your address is on the To: line (+10 -10) If you are not on the To: line, but anyone else at acedsl.com is, then the score will be 10. Gary V --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] Turn off the annoying razor log?
Matt wrote: You decide, it can make a big difference in the speed that the Bayes database is written to or read from: http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.0.x/dist/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#miscellaneous_options Is the Bayesian database on by default? If so, doesn't it require training? Yes, it is on by default. The default is to auto_learn. I find auto_learn works fine for me, I personally don't bother to train. Devising some method for your users feed false positives to 'sa-learn --ham' would be good. And false negatives to 'sa-learn --spam' would provide additional training. How you would accomplish that would take some thought. I think you would have to find a way to get the original mail that you wanted learned over to the gateway servers also. The mail cannot be forwarded, it must be exactly as it was when it was received. All in all, not necessarily a trivial task. Gary V --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
Re: [AMaViS-user] is it possible with amamvis or spamassassin
I don't know why you would want to do that, mainly because I'm not sure you are aware of the potential problems. i think your right it might not be a good idea. --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
