Hi all,
Running Sendmail/Amavis/Spamassassin/Dovecot on a couple of servers. About
50% of the users prefer to be spoon-fed their SPAM in their inbox, for the
other 50% or so we've set up to sort their SPAM into an IMAP spam folder
using plussed addressing.
A number of users still use POP to acce
> > Have had a few messages getting through lately that should have been
> tagged
> > as spam but appear not to have the subject line tagged.
>
> Is the recipient considered local by amavis? This is a requirement for
> spam tagging. See "No spam-related headers inserted?" here :
No, the user is
Have had a few messages getting through lately that should have been tagged
as spam but appear not to have the subject line tagged.
I check the headers and see (some headers removed)...
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Score: 9.498
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=9.498 tagged_above=2 req
Hi Les,
> Yes we have, but my increase was about three weeks ago. It is due to
> the size of the gif/jpeg file being greater than the
> $sa_mail_body_size_limit directive in the amavisd.conf file.
>
> When I first started receiving these messages the image included was
> 65K in size, the $sa_mail
Hi All,
Sorry a bit off topic but just wondering if any other fellow Amavis-ites
have been seeing insane amounts of really low scoring SPAM over the past 5
days or so? Typically they seem to have an attached GIF a two-word subject
and a paragraph or two of random text. While a few seem to be get
Hi All,
Just wondering if anyone knows if the amavisd-new RPMS that just appeared in
Fedora-Extras will do a clean upgrade from the DAG/RPMForge packages that
had been previously floating around.
I have had a nasty surprise 'upgrading' to a Fedora-Extras dist once before
with their ClamAV packagi
Hi Gary,
> This is one idea.
>
> [ qr'.\.(xex|dat)$'i => 0 ],# allow renamed
> .exe, and .dat
I'll give that a try. Have been scouring the logfiles and I think I can see
where it's flagging the .dat files from
Feb 8 08:37:31 ghrd1 amavis[30578]: (30578) Blocked BANNED (multi
Am having an issue on a server running Amavisd-new 2.3.2 (sendmail-milter
configuration)... the users are sending attachments which are banned, but
the banned file notifications are getting scored so highly as spam by the
server that they are being discarded... hence from the user point of view
em
Hi All,
Just wondering if anyone knows if the amavisd-new RPMS that just appeared in
Fedora-Extras will do a clean upgrade from the DAG/RPMForge packages that
had been previously floating around.
I have had a nasty surprise 'upgrading' to a Fedora-Extras dist once before
with their ClamAV packagi
I have a client running amavisd-new 2.3.2 who is experiencing difficulties
sending and receiving several file types that they need to be able to
handle. I've gone through the config file and don't see anything obvious so
I'm hoping someone can point me in the right direction. They need to be
able
> Has Dag stopped producing rpm's for Amavisd-new?
> I noticed that the last in his repo are 2.3.2 and are for RH
> up to FC3.
>From what I understand (2nd or 3rdhand now) apparently DAG is concentrating
on FC3 and previous versions, but FC4 versions of all his packages are
available through the
> > however it has been shy on ram for months, and it has plenty of
> > (unused) swap, so given things have been working fine for a week I
> > highly doubt that it is lack of RAM.
>
> It's confusing use of ENOMEM in amavisd_response() in amavisd.c.
> It mean that response from amavisd-new is l
Amavis setup was working just fine for about a week after switching from
amavis-milter to Petr's amavisd-milter, then earlier today all of a sudden
I noticed no mail was coming in, look in the logs and I see this...
Sep 6 00:53:10 stage2 amavisd-milter[10209]: j867qwKD010376: mlfi_eom:
could not
Amavis setup was working just fine for about a week after switching from
amavis-milter to Petr's amavisd-milter, then earlier today all of a sudden
I noticed no mail was coming in, look in the logs and I see this...
Sep 6 00:53:10 stage2 amavisd-milter[10209]: j867qwKD010376: mlfi_eom:
could not
Hi All,
Anybody have any good SpamAssassin rules for blocking 'Russian' SPAM. We've
been getting absolutely bombarded with the stuff over the past few days.
Hrm, at least I think it's SPAM, maybe I've won the lottery and just don't
understand :-)
Cheers,
> Mike <
--
> @local_domains_maps = ( [".$mydomain"],
>read_hash("/etc/amavis/localaliases"),
>read_hash("/etc/amavis/virtualdomains") );
>
> Looks like this works in this case. Simply comma separate the items.
Couldn't be that simple HAHA. Thanks, I'll give that a try :-)
Cheers,
> Mike <
Just wondering the proper syntax to configure amavis to read local domains
from multiple sources?
That is to say I need to combine so that the @local_domains_maps ends up as
the sum total of all three entities below...
@local_domains_maps = ( [".$mydomain"] );
@local_domains_maps = ( read_hash("/
Have now attempted to turn on the defang_spam functionality with the hope of
returning to something as close as possible to the "report" message that
spamassassin would send after processing a spam (ie. body replacement with
original message attached as mime part).
To that end I have added the fol
Have now attempted to turn on the defang_spam functionality with the hope of
returning to something as close as possible to the "report" message that
spamassassin would send after processing a spam (ie. body replacement with
original message attached as mime part).
To that end I have added the fol
> scanning, how
> > can a message get virus scanned but not get spam scanned?
>
> Most likely these recipient domains which don't get
> X-Spam-Status are not listed in your @local_domains_maps.
Thanks Mark, that was it!
Cheers,
> Mike <
--
Have recently converted my system from running amavisd-new for virus
scanning with spamass-milter for spam to using amavisd-new for both spam
and virus. Seemed to be working great all weekend but I have noticed
something very odd this evening, and am hoping someone might have an idea
what is happ
For what it's worth it looks like they may have "moved"... just got the
first batch of...
http://spaces.msn.com/members/GuadalupeSzekula/?H5=Best_offerings.coming!_T
So everybody may want to get a jump on adding a regex for that to your
rulesets :-)
Based on the general format of these URLs, how
22 matches
Mail list logo
