RE: sa-learn and modern spam sizes
I've never seen spam larger than 3 MB. which is much bigger than the 256 kB limit in sa-learn that the OP is having a problem with. Indeed, of course I agree the avg. spam size is much much lower. But a lot of the manual spam, typically originating in asia where people send out spam through Hotmail/gmail can be 1-3MB in size. Most of these are electronics or textile oriented business offers. And my problem remains, our setup is based on MailScanner (a daemon like amavis-new) which doesn't use spamc/spamd so I'm unable to train my bayes on these 1MB+ size spams, which is a problem. So can I conclude that there's no real solution to this besides code change? Should I open a bug about it? Med venlig hilsen / Best regards Jonas Akrouh Larsen TechBiz ApS Laplandsgade 4, 2. sal 2300 København S Office: 7020 0979 Direct: 3336 9974 Mobile: 5120 1096 Fax: 7020 0978 Web: www.techbiz.dk
Re: SA Sorbs Usage/Rules
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 13:57 -0500, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote: Basically, without evidence money is not charged to be delisted from any of those three lists, they're going to stay out of the default rule set. On 17.12.11 12:16, Noel Butler wrote: Lastly, I would have thought SA dev team would have liked to see hard evidence that someone was _forced_ to pay the 50 donation to be delisted, because all I here is the web site says it which frankly doesn't cut it with me, we were nobody special to SORBS, so I can't see why they'd remove us for free but forcibly demand payments from others, the only common ground we had with Matt back then was we were both located in the same city, along with 2 million others. afaik, the request for donating $50 to charity (not paying SORBS! some people did have lied about this) was removed some time ago, and delisting is now done upon request. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.
Re: SA Sorbs Usage/Rules
On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 11:20 +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 13:57 -0500, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote: Basically, without evidence money is not charged to be delisted from any of those three lists, they're going to stay out of the default rule set. On 17.12.11 12:16, Noel Butler wrote: Lastly, I would have thought SA dev team would have liked to see hard evidence that someone was _forced_ to pay the 50 donation to be delisted, because all I here is the web site says it which frankly doesn't cut it with me, we were nobody special to SORBS, so I can't see why they'd remove us for free but forcibly demand payments from others, the only common ground we had with Matt back then was we were both located in the same city, along with 2 million others. afaik, the request for donating $50 to charity (not paying SORBS! some people did have lied about this) was removed some time ago, and delisting is now done upon request. Paying to charities correct, but hey, you know, some people can't let the facts get in the way of a ruining a good whinge, and you're right, it was my understanding also this was being removed from the website some time ago, but haven't been to check it out so can not comment one way or another. Cheers signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Using ZMI_GERMAN ruleset
* Stefan Jakobs ste...@localside.net [2011-11-16 11:28]: Hi list, the published ruleset in the update channel is much older than the ruleset on the named website. # dig +short -t txt 2.3.3.70_zmi_german.cf.zmi.sa-update.dostech.net txt 20100831 Is the update with sa-update still supported? Michael, could you answer that? Regards, Sebastian -- New GPG Key: 0x93A0B9CE (F4F6 B1A3 866B 26E9 450A 9D82 58A2 D94A 93A0 B9CE) Old GPG Key-ID: 0x76B79F20 (0x1B6034F476B79F20) 'Are you Death?' ... IT'S THE SCYTHE, ISN'T IT? PEOPLE ALWAYS NOTICE THE SCYTHE. -- Terry Pratchett, The Fifth Elephant
Re: Using ZMI_GERMAN ruleset
Sorry for the delay. I don't read the list normally, so please always CC me if you want to reach me. On Mittwoch, 16. November 2011 Stefan Jakobs wrote: the published ruleset in the update channel is much older than the ruleset on the named website. # dig +short -t txt 2.3.3.70_zmi_german.cf.zmi.sa-update.dostech.net txt 20100831 Is the update with sa-update still supported? I'm sorry, I've contacted Daryl C. W. O'Shea spamassas...@dostech.ca on Februar 12 and September 5, 2011, he wanted to look it up but it seems still old. @Daryl: Any chance you can fix that? If you tell me no, I can remove it from the list of possible updates. The correct way to get ZMI_GERMAN is currently per web on http://sa.zmi.at/rulesets/70_zmi_german.cf Version: 3.00.3 from 2011-12-19 If someone can describe exactly what to do to create my own channel with 10 minutes of work, I can do so, but I don't want to run around searching for that info, I'm too busy with other projects. I'd also need info what users would then need to do to get that updates. -- mit freundlichen Grüssen, Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc it-management Internet Services: Protéger http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee] Tel: +43 660 / 415 6531 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
SURBL down ?
I am not able to lookup surbl Infact the domain surbl.org does not seem to exist at all. [root@pop2 bin]# dig surbl.org +short [root@pop2 bin]# I am sorry if this is old news .. I have no idea since when SURBL went down ? Thanks Ram
Re: SURBL down ?
Hi! I am not able to lookup surbl Infact the domain surbl.org does not seem to exist at all. [root@pop2 bin]# dig surbl.org +short [root@pop2 bin]# I am sorry if this is old news .. I have no idea since when SURBL went down ? [raymond@noc ~]$ dig ns surbl.org ; DiG 9.6.2-P2-RedHat-9.6.2-5.P2.fc12 ns surbl.org ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 17918 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 7, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 9 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;surbl.org. IN NS ;; ANSWER SECTION: surbl.org. 86400 IN NS ns302.surbl.org. surbl.org. 86400 IN NS ns100.surbl.org. surbl.org. 86400 IN NS ns101.surbl.org. surbl.org. 86400 IN NS ns200.surbl.org. surbl.org. 86400 IN NS ns201.surbl.org. surbl.org. 86400 IN NS ns300.surbl.org. surbl.org. 86400 IN NS ns301.surbl.org. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: ns100.surbl.org.86400 IN A 94.228.131.210 ns100.surbl.org.86400 IN 2a00:d00:ff:131:94:228:131:210 ns101.surbl.org.86400 IN A 94.228.131.211 ns101.surbl.org.86400 IN 2a00:d00:ff:131:94:228:131:211 ns200.surbl.org.86400 IN A 192.42.119.11 ns201.surbl.org.86400 IN A 192.42.119.21 ns300.surbl.org.86400 IN A 212.227.252.16 ns301.surbl.org.86400 IN A 74.208.174.204 ns302.surbl.org.86400 IN A 88.208.233.73 What does that give you? There is -no- A record voor surbl.org. What does for example www.surbl.org give you back? Bye, Raymond.
