Hello Folks..
What's the meaning of the following error message?
Jun 14 08:41:34 scilla amavis[619722]:
(k5E6fG2N619390) Requesting process rundown due to stale Sophos virus data
It started after upgranding from 2.2.0 to 2.3.3.
The Sophos Support wasn't able to give me any useful answer...
Ciao
Michael wrote:
>> Ok, so we educate the users, tell them 'only reply back and unsubscribe
>> for valid mailing lists'.
>> Yeh, right :-)
I think advertisements from legitimate companies typically have a link
to unsubscribe. You rarely reply to a bulk mail from them. Even if
replying is the method
> > Both can easily coexist on the same host.
> > I use MySQL for amavisd user preferences and SA Bayes db,
> > and PostgreSQL for logging.
>
> I suppose they can, I just hate to think of the extra overhead.
I don't think there is much overhead, a pgsql process takes about
10% of amavisd+SA memory
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Mark Martinec
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 10:01 AM
> To: amavis-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [AMaViS-user] Pre-release of
> amavisd-new-2.4.2,pen pals soft-whitelisting
>
>
> Mich
> There are two kinds of size limits:
I should add: there is also a set of (generous) size limits
designed to stop runaway decoding on mail bombs:
$MAXLEVELS = 14;# (default is undef, no limit)
$MAXFILES = 1500; # (default is undef, no limit)
$MIN_EXPANSION_QUOTA =
Troy,
> >From another list I heard that:
> "amavisd-new supports size restrictions on virus scans"
>
> Meaning that messages above a specified size will bypass a virus scan.
> Is this correct?
No, never. It would be too easy to send infected mail,
which is far worse than an oversized spam.
(but I
Gordon wrote:
> That makes sense. The primary MX gets much more traffic than then backup
> MX, but I was hoping that Amavisd-new would not bother running spam
> tests on something clearly generated by itself.
If you are running Postfix, you can bypass amavisd-new for mail that
is created by the
>From another list I heard that:
"amavisd-new supports size restrictions on virus scans"
Meaning that messages above a specified size will bypass a virus scan.
Is this correct? I'll be darned if I can find such an option.
I have not implemented amavisd-new yet, but am considering it.
--
Tro
Oh, you're right. On the machine not showing a spam score, the log shows:
Jun 12 23:58:42 osiris amavis[5815]: [ID 702911 mail.info] (05815-08)
spam_scan: not wasting time on SA, message longer than 204800 bytes:
326+312287
That makes sense. The primary MX gets much more traffic than then backu
Gordon,
> ...one machine doesn't tag the mail as spam:
> X-Spam-Score: -
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=x required=6 tests=[]
>
> While the other machine does:
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=5.436 required=6 tests=...
On the first machine SA was not called or timed out.
The reason could be: mail size la
Stuart,
> amavisd-new does not currently seem to find new rules downloaded by
> sa-update. The problem is that Mail::SpamAssassin does not look in the
> right directories by default. Although I'd consider it a bug in SA, I
> don't know that it is likely to be fixed.
>
> Perhaps amavisd-new-2.4.2
amavisd-new does not currently seem to find new rules downloaded by
sa-update. The problem is that Mail::SpamAssassin does not look in the
right directories by default. Although I'd consider it a bug in SA, I
don't know that it is likely to be fixed.
Perhaps amavisd-new-2.4.2 could provide a
Solaris 9
Postfix 2.2.10
Amavisd-New 2.4.0
Hi,
I have configured two machines with amavisd-new. I built these machines
at relatively the same time and I just copied the config from the good
machine to the problem machine and changed the hostname section. When
running the daily mail/spam report
Bryan,
> The test message I sent was from an external email address ( and a
> different machine all together ).
>
> I sent another test message used grepped the log file as you suggested and
> this was the output of the two grep commands:
> I'm not exactly sure what this tells me though.
> Jun 8
Helmut,
> sorry if I missed something but is there a place where man can see what
> changes happend to amavisd.conf? It is always hard to diff the old
> customized conf file with a new one.
>From Gary V:
| Then why not download and diff the two originals?
Right, there is currently no better way
Ed,
> ...The odd behavior is occasionally the mail will start to stack up in the
> postfix queue, climbing up to 800. Amavis is processing mail, and the speed
> per message is normal, but it appears to be picking up the emails from
> postfix very slowly. Eventually it will clear the queue. But lf
Per,
> The incoming servers ARE listed in @mynetworks, the line "SPAM FROM
> LOCAL ..." is correct in a sense but not really interesting, obviously
> ALL incoming mail passes throughthe MX's first.
You are right, the FROM LOCAL becomes useless information in such setup.
The IP address of the clie
Maurizio wrote:
> Hi tehre
> sorry for lamer post :(
> i would:
> for banned contents emails, i would quarantine banned attachments,
configure a quarantine, for example:
$banned_files_quarantine_method = 'local:banned-%m'; # default
$banned_quarantine_to = 'banned-quarantine'; # local defau
Stuart,
> I would like add to the amavisd-new SQL-storage in order to record the
> spam tests that a message hit. This would be so that I can track how
> often certain rules are hitting. Has anyone done this and would like to
> share their implementation?
Modify updating of msgs table in sub sa
Michael,
> ...But had another application on same system that didn't seem to like
> postgres all that well.
> ... I liked postgres for the transactional triggers, but in the end, found
> it caused problems with other application (amavis worked just fine)
Both can easily coexist on the same host.
Terry,
> I am not seeing any rules in the logs or headers with hit counts. I
> am only seeing totals:
>
> Jun 12 11:25:59 foo.server.com amavis[27227]: (27227-05) FWD via SMTP:
> <> -> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, BODY=8BITMIME 250 2.6.0 Ok, id=27227-05, from
> MTA([127.0.0.1]:10025): 250 Ok: queued as 98
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Mark Martinec
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 8:39 AM
> To: amavis-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [AMaViS-user] Pre-release of
> amavisd-new-2.4.2,pen pals soft-whitelisting
>
> Michael,
Maciej,
> when one tries to start amavisd-new while amavis user doesn't have rx
> permissions to the current directory: ...
> amavisd doesn't run. instead it ends with:
>
> Jun 12 18:27:53 hostname /opt/local/amavis/amavisd[6594]: TROUBLE in
> pre_loop_hook: db_init: BDB bad db env. at /var/amavis
Ralf,
> Is amavisd-new affected by this:
> 20060610
> Cleanup: XCLIENT and XFORWARD attribute values are now sent
> as xtext encoded strings. For backwards compatibility,
> Postfix will still accept unencoded attribute values. Files:
> smtpd/smtpd.c, smtpd/smtpd_proxy.c,
Michael,
> Guess I have to break down and implement sql logging :-)
:-)
I had an intermediate version which used a separate table:
CREATE TABLE penpals (
sidinteger NOT NULL, -- sender: maddr.id
ridinteger NOT NULL, -- recipient: maddr.id
send_time integer NOT NULL, -- se
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Mark Martinec
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 8:15 AM
> To: amavis-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [AMaViS-user] Pre-release of
> amavisd-new-2.4.2,pen pals soft-whitelisting
>
>
> Michae
Hi tehre
sorry for lamer post :(
i would:
for banned contents emails, i would quarantine banned attachments, notify
sender and receiver (next, i will install mailzu)
for virus or spamming, do not quarantine and do not notify anyone
at the moment, in my basic conf, none is notified (postmaster onl
Michael,
> Another way to do it would be like 'GFI' does.
> ON all outgoing email, they whitelist the recipient. (well, forever)
> Would it not be easier to just take the To: address, and add it to the
> AWL whitelist?
All the infrastracture was already in place,
I only had to add a query, so thi
* Mark Martinec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> A pre-release of amavisd-new-2.4.2 is available at:
>
> http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/amavisd-new-2.4.2-pre1.tar.gz
>
> The 2.4.2 will primarily be a bug fix release,
> but adds two interesting new features.
Is amavisd-new affected by this:
20060610
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Mark Martinec
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 6:25 AM
> To: amavis-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> Cc: Aaron P. Martinez
> Subject: [AMaViS-user] Pre-release of amavisd-new-2.4.2,pen
> pals soft-whitel
A pre-release of amavisd-new-2.4.2 is available at:
http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/amavisd-new-2.4.2-pre1.tar.gz
The 2.4.2 will primarily be a bug fix release,
but adds two interesting new features.
SUMMARY OF CHANGES:
- new feature: "pen pals soft-whitelisting" lowers spam score of rece
31 matches
Mail list logo
