Reports are done by every assp instance separately - requests are forwared
to the right instance (needs configuration). So, don't sync log files.
The rebuildspamdb task should only run on the master.
>We need to sync the spam/notspam/discarded folders anyway, for spamdb
rebuilding.
Yes.
My assp
HI Peter,
I'm sorry. I forgot to change the same use of the same statement in line
1959 of ASSP_AFC.pl 4.35.
This is solved in 4.36 - it is just released.
Thomas
Von:Peter Hinman
An: assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Datum: 19.08.2016 01:31
Betreff:Re: [Assp-user] ASSP_AFC 4
- Original Message -
> From: "aquilinux"
> To: "For Users of ASSP"
> Sent: Monday, August 1, 2016 4:11:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Parameter OutgoingBufSizeNew not applied in ASSP
> 2.4.7?
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Nguyen Nang Thang > wrote:
>
>> "...message size 112
Hi Thomas -
I've installed 4.35 and now assp is crashing. On restart, I get the
following line in the log file.
2016-08-18 23:22:08 [Worker_1] Warning: got unexpected signal SEGV in Worker_1:
package - ASSP_AFC, file - /opt/assp/Plugins/ASSP_AFC.pm, line - 1959!
Running assp 16090 on linux, P
Nope, even with the ASSP.pl tweak, I'm still getting
Aug-18-16 18:06:33 Warning: got unexpected signal SEGV in Worker_2: package
- ASSP_AFC, file - c:/ASSPPlugins/ASSP_AFC.pm, line - 1959!
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 5:47 PM, K Post wrote:
> I'm running Perl 5.20.1 on Windows and even with AFC 4.35
I'm running Perl 5.20.1 on Windows and even with AFC 4.35 I'm getting LOTS
of
Aug-18-16 17:37:06 Warning: got unexpected signal SEGV in Worker_1: package
- ASSP_AFC, file - c:/ASSP/Plugins/ASSP_AFC.pm, line - 1959!
I'll try the ASSP.pl modification, but wanted to raise a flag since you
indicated
One more question about this:
How does spam reporting work in a multi server setup?
Will the master ASSP installation generate reports and the slaves won't do any
reporting at all?
If so, how does the master know which emails on the slaves were blocked for
which reason?
We need to sync the spa
So I have to add ups.com to blockstrictSPFRe?
- Original Message -
From: Thomas Eckardt
[mailto:thomas.ecka...@thockar.com]
To: For Users of ASSP
[mailto:assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net]
Sent: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 18:15:18
+0100
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Whitelist & spam
> >They are all sent
>They are all sent from random *@ups.com addresses using a lot of
different IP's.
SPF will catch it.
Thomas
Von:"Andy Knuts"
An: "For Users of ASSP"
Datum: 18.08.2016 16:42
Betreff:Re: [Assp-user] Whitelist & spam
Yes. I'm using the included whiteListDomains so ASSP de
Yes. I'm using the included whiteListDomains so ASSP default configuration is
to whitelist ups.com.
Maybe I need to enable BayesWL?
- Original Message -
From: K Post
[mailto:nntp.p...@gmail.com]
To: For Users of ASSP
[mailto:assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net]
Sent: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 16:26:19
Do you have ups.com in whiteListedDomains?
The line:
Aug-18-16 12:46:17 m1-17176-01346 [Worker_3] 83.110.218.163 <
rosalyn.backman...@ups.com> to: s...@seniorennet.be Whitelisted sender
Domain: @ups.com
leads me to believe that you do.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 7:44 AM, Andy Knuts wrote:
>
Thanks Thomas,
that seems to have fixed it so far.
Will now try to work out why it finds .gz files unrecognisable.
Thanks,
James.
> On 18 Aug. 2016, at 6:27 pm, Thomas Eckardt
> wrote:
>
> I've just released ASSP_AFC 4.35 (CVS and SF) - the SEGV should be fixed
> there.
> Depending on the
I do have "DoOrgWhiting" set to "Score" instead of "Whiting".
Shouldn't it just decrease the score because ups.com is whitelisted and still
continue with other other checks (hmm/bayes) as normal?
- Original Message -
From: Andy Knuts [mailto:a...@knuts.be]
To:
assp-user@lists.sourceforge
Today we have a lot of spam getting through. They are all sent from random
*@ups.com addresses using a lot of different IP's. Here's an example:
Aug-18-16 12:46:15 [Worker_3] Connected: session:7EFE8B4366C0
83.110.218.163:56196 > :25 > 127.0.0.1:125
Aug-18-16 12:46:17 m1-17176-01346 [Worker_3]
I've just released ASSP_AFC 4.35 (CVS and SF) - the SEGV should be fixed
there.
Depending on the used OS and Perl it may be possible, that an additionaly
small correction of assp.pl is required to fix this SEGV.
Try ASSP_AFC 4.35 and tell me if it works for you.
assp.pl correction is: move the t
>Will there be an update to 3.x?
No, version 3 will be removed, when the next assp.pl will be released.
You can use version 4.
Thomas
Von:K Post
An: For Users of ASSP
Datum: 17.08.2016 23:45
Betreff:Re: [Assp-user] ASSP_AFC 4.34 released
Thanks.
Will there be an update to
>I think this is two issues: 1) the unrecognised archive format and 2) the
unexpected signal SEGV error
Yes, this seems to be the case.
The first one, is an error from Archive::Libarchive::XS. It is unable to
detectthe archive format.
The second one is caused by the first. ASSP_AFC is falling ba
17 matches
Mail list logo
