Re: How much does whitelist_from really do?
Peter Guhl wrote: We have a really huge whitelist - all inserted in user_prefs using "whitelist_from". But I constantly get told that mails from people at this list got flagged as spam. That makes me wonder... do I have to do something specific to make sure sa honors "whitelist_from"? Does it only shift the score or bypass scanning? You may want to do a whitelist_to for the spamassassin-users@ address. -- Matt Barton Webexcellence PH: 317.423.3548 x22 TF: 800.808.6332 x22 FX: 317.423.8735 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.webexc.com
Re: URIDNSBL on freebsd?
Jeff Chan wrote: Try removing from your resolv.conf: nameserver 127.0.0.1 and adding some external nameservers. This may be a bug in the FreeBSD version of SpamAssassin. If the DNS server on the system does listen in a regular interface, you may be able to set the entry in resolv.conf to the IP address on that interface (i.e. a public IP address that is local to the server). -- Matt Barton Webexcellence PH: 317.423.3548 x22 TF: 800.808.6332 x22 FX: 317.423.8735 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.webexc.com
Re: SA vs. postfix main.cf
Per Jessen wrote: Not that I can think of. Essentially you need to decide who makes the decision for you - SA or Postfix. By the time postfix delivers the mail to SA via the content_filter, all the Postfix checks are complete - smtpd__restrictions - so if postfix has decided to reject an email, SA can't really override that later. Therefore, if your users disagree with your blockinglist, don't use those blockinglist(s) in postfix and leave it to SA. In order to do the same kind of whitelisting in Postfix, you'd basically need to setup some check_*_access checks before your RBL's allowing them to pass. -- Matt Barton Webexcellence PH: 317.423.3548 x22 TF: 800.808.6332 x22 FX: 317.423.8735 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.webexc.com
Re: sa-learn ham
Gustafson, Tim wrote: How do you keep your ntokens so low? Mine averages ((nspam + nham) * 10). Yours is basically (nspam + nham). Do you run some job that expires tokens or something? I'm running sa-learn --force-expire once a day (and it takes about 2-3 minutes to run) but the ntokens never seems to go down. :\ I don't run --force-expire at all. I think it will automatically expire tokens when certain criteria are met -- none of which I can recall as I write this e-mail, though I know you can find it online. I have a conrjob that runs a script every half-hour that checks for e-mails that need to be manually fed in to sa-learn. It pulls them out of designated ham and spam IMAP folders, runs them through sa-learn, and then runs sa-learn again with --sync. I think the --sync may be what does it, but I don't know for sure. -Original Message----- From: Matt Barton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 11:27 AM To: SA Users List Subject: Re: sa-learn ham Since we're all playing show-and-tell, here is a dump of the magic on my company's mail server. 0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db version 0.000 0 101024 0 non-token data: nspam 0.000 0 164343 0 non-token data: nham 0.000 0 240026 0 non-token data: ntokens -- Matt Barton Webexcellence PH: 317.423.3548 x22 TF: 800.808.6332 x22 FX: 317.423.8735 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.webexc.com
Re: sa-learn ham
Gustafson, Tim wrote: 0.000 0 2 0 non-token data: bayes db version 0.000 0 88033 0 non-token data: nspam 0.000 0 15592 0 non-token data: nham 0.000 01729756 0 non-token data: ntokens 0.000 0 1010964573 0 non-token data: oldest atime 0.000 0 1762110386 0 non-token data: newest atime 0.000 0 1101309901 0 non-token data: last journal sync atime 0.000 0 1101301792 0 non-token data: last expiry atime 0.000 0 0 0 non-token data: last expire atime delta 0.000 0 0 0 non-token data: last expire reduction count I agree with Jim that having your SPAM/HAM numbers match doesn't really matter, as long as you have sufficient amounts of each. I think the "threshold" where my users started to expierence the best filtering accuracy was when I topped 1000 SPAMs and HAMs. But, as Jim said before, your mileage may vary. Since we're all playing show-and-tell, here is a dump of the magic on my company's mail server. 0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db version 0.000 0 101024 0 non-token data: nspam 0.000 0 164343 0 non-token data: nham 0.000 0 240026 0 non-token data: ntokens 0.000 0 1101226944 0 non-token data: oldest atime 0.000 0 1101313137 0 non-token data: newest atime 0.000 0 1101313136 0 non-token data: last journal sync atime 0.000 0 1101270336 0 non-token data: last expiry atime 0.000 0 43200 0 non-token data: last expire atime delta 0.000 0 196502 0 non-token data: last expire reduction count My auto-learn thresholds are set as follows in the global local.cf. bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam 0.8 bayes_auto_learn_threshold_spam 10.0 It is very important that you keep your bayes_min_[ham|spam]_num settings to at least 1000. -- Matt Barton Webexcellence PH: 317.423.3548 x22 TF: 800.808.6332 x22 FX: 317.423.8735 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.webexc.com
