You are using SpamAssassin 3.3 and Debian 7, both which are deprecated years
ago and likely full of security holes? Are you kidding me?
Anyway, I've fixed the has() calls on SA rule updates, the error should go
away in few days when new updates roll out.. good luck for your servers..
On
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 01:46:33PM +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:30:44AM +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > malware should be detected by clamav or other AV.
>
> On 25.02.22 07:23, Henrik K wrote:
> > .. because ClamAV
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 02:31:09PM -0500, Alex wrote:
>
> I identified an 8MB false-positive.
And what rules caused it to be a false-positive? Size doesn't matter here.
Fix the rules, add whitelisting etc.
> Is it the case that spammers are sending malware as large as 8MB files now?
Why
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:30:44AM +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> malware should be detected by clamav or other AV.
.. because ClamAV is such an infallible tool and "malware" can
never be catched with "spam" indicators?
Unwanted mail is unwanted mail, use all the tools you have and
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 10:09:02PM -0500, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
> The sa_mail_body_size_limit variable is to stop scanning when the
> message body is larger than a certain size, but what about
> attachments? Is there a variable to skip processing messages that
> contain attachments larger than a
On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 07:15:38PM +0200, Luc Pardon wrote:
> On Sun, 16 May 2021 18:57:49 +0300
> Henrik K wrote:
>
> > Well, old lazy code is also a bad thing. I already noticed there's
> > suspect matching, $members =~ /\b$user\b/ might falsely match group
> > n
On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 05:32:18PM +0200, Luc Pardon wrote:
> >
> > Just copy code from SpamAssassin for example, it's worked for a
> > decade everywhere:
>
> One would think that a decade would be plenty of time to get it copied
> over into amavisd .
>
> Seriously, thanks for the pointer. It
On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 05:55:19PM +0200, Luc Pardon wrote:
>
> Other than the extra dependency, I don't see any reason why not.
Please never use horrible dependencies for trivial functions. Especially
ones that are not readibly available for all distributions, or are just
plain bloaty (the
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 02:41:31PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> Aha, merge requests! I searched for issues but found nothing. isn't it
> considered better to fill an issue before sending merge request?
Don't ask me..
While I appreciate that someone took over amavisd maintenance,
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 01:18:05PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm getting this message on my system:
>
>
> May 29 11:59:58 proxy2 amavis[7537]: (07537-13) (!)do_unrar: can't parse info
> line for "" *-rw-r--r--599246600832 100% 2020-05-29 11:59 86328207
>
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 02:30:47PM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 02:21:25PM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 01:40:32PM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> > >
> > > Actually I found the problem, looking at my locally patched amavisd..
> &
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 02:21:25PM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 01:40:32PM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> >
> > Actually I found the problem, looking at my locally patched amavisd..
> >
> > The patch is missing one call.
> >
> > Look for s
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 01:40:32PM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
>
> Actually I found the problem, looking at my locally patched amavisd..
>
> The patch is missing one call.
>
> Look for string
>
> # load policy banks from the 'client_ipaddr_policy' lookup
>
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 12:55:26PM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 12:46:12PM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:29:08AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > >>>>Can you advise me easy way to log e.g. Received: heade
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 12:46:12PM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:29:08AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > >>>>Can you advise me easy way to log e.g. Received: headers from
> > >>>>amavisd-new
> > >>>>or a hin
> >>Because of reason unknown to me yet, mail is tagged as originating:
>
> On 21.04.20 21:48, Henrik K wrote:
> >And you really have atleast amavisd-new 2.11.0-6.1 package version
>
> yes.
>
> >which has the well know originating bug fixed?
>
>
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 05:32:01PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> >>Can you advise me easy way to log e.g. Received: headers from amavisd-new
> >>or a hint, what more to log?
>
> On 20.04.20 23:22, Damian wrote:
> >Run amavis with debug-sa parameter and egrep for "tag RELAY|trusted". Do
>
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 03:34:59PM +0200, Engels, Jan wrote:
> Hi Ralph,
>
> yes, the tools on a particular platform are independent of amavis but
> unfortunately I am currently also experiencing Problems with unrar and Amavis
> and in
> this case it seems that the problem lies on amavis side. I
On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 07:38:57AM -, Giovanni Bechis wrote:
> mabi wrote:
> > [-- text/plain, encoding base64, charset: UTF-8, 10 lines --]
> >
> > ? Original Message ?
> > On Friday, July 19, 2019 3:55 PM, Dominic Raferd
> > wrote:
> >
> >> The
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 03:59:37PM +, mabi wrote:
> ? Original Message ?
> On Friday, July 19, 2019 5:23 PM, Henrik K wrote:
>
> > Ah sorry I think you need this also
> >
> > $sa_debug = 'info';
>
> I tried that too
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 03:02:21PM +, mabi wrote:
> ? Original Message ?
> On Friday, July 19, 2019 4:10 PM, Henrik K wrote:
>
> > There zero need to do any postfix hacks.
> >
> > Simply use amavis $log_level = 2 and it w
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 02:55:02PM +0100, Dominic Raferd wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 14:06, mabi <[1]m...@protonmail.ch> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I would like to log the typical X-Spam-Status mail header which gets added
> by SpamAssassin to a mail into the amavis log file in order
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 08:13:36PM +0100, Ralph Seichter wrote:
> * Henrik K.:
>
> > If I revert these removed lines to 2.11.1, it seems to work
>
> That's a known issue, and an open merge request already exists:
> https://gitlab.com/amavis/amavis/merge_requests/1
Ah
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 08:35:21PM +0200, Henrik K wrote:
>
> Does someone use 2.11 with amavisd-milter?
>
> I tried upgrading from 2.10.1, but it seems 2.11.1 marks ALL messages as
> Originating. I don't have any special policy banks, just MYNETS which is
> not hitting
Does someone use 2.11 with amavisd-milter?
I tried upgrading from 2.10.1, but it seems 2.11.1 marks ALL messages as
Originating. I don't have any special policy banks, just MYNETS which is
not hitting here.
Trying to follow the code.. with diff you can see few places where the
handling for
On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 02:14:14PM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > I hope Amavis could still be maintained. DSPAM is already gone. If also
> > Amavis dies, Spamassassin will follow...
>
> Especially since Mark is/was active in both amavisd and SpamAssassin!
You can't compare one-man shop to
On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 04:30:12PM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
I'm kind of curious as to whether or not 0MQ is dead. I've filed
multiple bug reports with them with zero feedback.
Are you serious? 24 days and you believe it's dead? Even during the most
popular holiday season? :-)
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 01:30:39PM +0200, Marko Weber wrote:
hi,
when i visit http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/
i get warnings from our squid-clamav:
Fri Apr 27 13:23:28 2012 - stream(127.0.0.1@1978):
MBL_240852.UNOFFICIAL FOUND
can someone by amavis check the website?
Just decode
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 08:42:25AM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 04:07:39PM -0300, francis picabia wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Mark Martinec
mark.martinec+ama...@ijs.si wrote:
So your outbound bounces are generated by a content filter
associated
29 matches
Mail list logo
