On 6/7/2011 7:22 PM, Adam Katz wrote:
> From SA's perspective, since we don't use $& or its kin, a regex that
> starts with an optional portion is the same as not having it. Therefore:
>
> header EXTRA_MPART_TYPE Content-Type =~ /(?:\s*multipart\/)?.*
> type=/i
>
> is functionally equivale
On 3/19/2010 9:39 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
> What happened to http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/ ?
> It bring up a list of ASF projects under its 'Product:' menu,
> but SpamAssassin is not on that list!?
>
> Mark
>
>
I get "Welcome to SA Bugzilla" now..
Joao Gouveia wrote:
> (resending this, used a wrong email account ..)
>
> Hi,
>
> I was checking for FPs in our RBL, and noticed that most of them are
> hitting on a ham corpus that doesn't look very hammy to me:
>
> http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20091121-r882858-n/T_RCVD_IN_ANBREP_L3?mclog=ham-n
Linda Walsh wrote:
> Didn't spamassassin also have a --ham or --spam flag?
>
> How do I train my filters on an mbox formatted file?
>
>
that's sa-learn, not spamassassin.
Warren Togami wrote:
> Should we consider all mail in the "Sent" box as legitimate ham to
> feed into the masscheck?
>
> Warren Togami
> wtog...@redhat.com
>
>
It's not going to have a normal set of headers on it, ie: it's unlikely
to contain any Received: headers, so I don't think that's good mass
Warren Togami wrote:
> When I redirect mboxget to a file, the resulting file seems to be not
> readable as an mbox file itself. Should it be?
>
> Trying to figure a way to automatically tell my users doing hand
> classification which mails they should examine without me reading
> their mail.
AFAI
Warren Togami wrote:
> On 06/29/2009 11:59 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 16:27, Warren Togami wrote:
>>> On 06/29/2009 07:44 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
How's about I cut an alpha at the end of this week?
>>> Why end of the week if nothing on the list is blockers?
>>
>>
Warren Togami wrote:
> On 08/28/2008 06:47 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>> hi Warren --
>>
>> There's been no real motion -- we've been infrequently bashing the
>> odd bug
>> in the 3.3.0 list, but we have no concrete release schedule yet. Sorry
>> about that...
>>
>> --j.
>
> How are things going n
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 19:17 -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
>> Maxim Masiutin wrote:
>>
>
>
>>> In The Bat!, both “Re numbering” and “X-Mailer” options are
>>> configurable in the program interface, and the user is ab
Maxim Masiutin wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> My name is Maxim Masiutin, from Ritlabs, we develop The Bat! e-mail client
> program.
>
> Malte S. Stretz have contacted me several years ago about the SpamAssassin
> rules related to The Bat! program, particularly REPTO_OVERQUOTE_THEBAT, but
> he no longer
I'm sorry Marc, but Apache SpamAssassin does not operate a blacklist. We
do not list domains, emails, or IP addresses.
Our project is a mail scanning system that performs queries against many
other blacklists, and it also examines the content of the message.
Looking at your post, I do notice that
Alan Halachmi wrote:
> I hope this list is appropriate...
It's not, but no big deal. This list is for discussing the development
effort of the project. Patches for bugs, etc.
You'll get a better, broader audience on the users list.
Also, you failed to specify what version you're trying to run.
Sidney Markowitz wrote:
Harald Binkle wrote, On 7/5/08 1:33 AM:
Hi, I just wondered why my bayes filter does not learn as much ham
mails as before. Then I realized that the USER_IN_WHITELIST
shortcirciut is set to spam which has tflags
noautoloearn. Does this really make sense?
The rationale
Gerd von Egidy wrote:
Hi Matt,
Do you see any problems (e.g. holes for spammers) with this logic?
The only problem I see is split-DNS configurations where there's an
internal server (ie: exchange) being used as the MX in the internal
view. As a result, SpamAssassin might see a comple
Zach Jones wrote:
Hi,
Am attempting to update using sa-update, but no matter what command I
try (checkonly, gpgno) I get the following error: [path]..gpg
required but not found
I found 2 text files in the directory with gpg keys, attempted to
import them with the sa-update import [path]
Gerd von Egidy wrote:
Do you see any problems (e.g. holes for spammers) with this logic?
The only problem I see is split-DNS configurations where there's an
internal server (ie: exchange) being used as the MX in the internal
view. As a result, SpamAssassin might see a completely different ho
andreas, unterm durchschnitt wrote:
>
>
>
> Problem with Rules: FROM_DOMAIN_NOVOWEL & URI_NOVOWEL
> regarding our Domain: "unterm-durchschnitt.de/unterm-durchschnitt.com"
I've taken the liberty of creating a bug so we can properly discuss and
track this issue. You can find it at:
http://issues.
the
MailScanner list for my postings there if you like, although I use a
different email address, I use the same name). But it's not a really
good tool for those who want per-user configurations.
Matt Kettler wrote:
> Anny Lei wrote:
>
>> Dear developers,
>>
>> I
Anny Lei wrote:
> Dear developers,
>
> I am using Mailscanner with Spamassassin and I want Spamassassin
> lookup LDAP for user preference. I have put user_scores_dsn,
> user_scores_ldap_username, and user_scores_ldap_password in local.cf.
> When I test running the command 'spamd -D --ldap-config
Anny Lei wrote:
> Dear developers,
>
> I am using Mailscanner with Spamassassin and I want Spamassassin
> lookup LDAP for user preference. I have put user_scores_dsn,
> user_scores_ldap_username, and user_scores_ldap_password in local.cf.
> When I test running the command 'spamd -D --ldap-config
Justin Mason wrote:
> Matt Kettler writes:
>
>> Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>>> rulesrc/sandbox/mkettler/20_drugs.cf: 1 active rules, 1 other
>>> rulesrc/sandbox/mkettler/25_uribl.cf: 0 active rules, 5 other
>>>
>> heh, there&
Justin Mason wrote:
> rulesrc/sandbox/mkettler/20_drugs.cf: 1 active rules, 1 other
> rulesrc/sandbox/mkettler/25_uribl.cf: 0 active rules, 5 other
heh, there's a sandbox with my name on it, and I never knew it :)
Michael Peddemors wrote:
> On Monday 01 October 2007 13:41, Justin Mason wrote:
>
>> I think this is a case where pragmatism may need to be applied. The thing
>> is, we *could* disable Razor, and later DCC, back then, because there were
>> alternatives doing more or less the same thing. If we di
Justin Mason wrote:
> Theo Van Dinter writes:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 08:29:24AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think the intent was to allow , merely .
>>>
>> If the idea is to help people doing the weekly/net runs, t
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>> queries for a particular domain to a the zone machine.
>>
> If so, it would be really easy to add a forwarding zone to forward all
>
> Yes. Of course it's possible to forward the requests to the zone machine.
>
> But that's not really a solution. The ASF folks alrea
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>
> That's great if we use the zone machine for DNS, that doesn't really work for
> individuals running on our own machines... ;)
>
Do you run a simple caching named on your machine?
If so, it would be really easy to add a forwarding zone to forward all
queries for a p
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
> On 8/19/2007 8:56 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
>> Doc Schneider wrote:
>>> Are we still planning on releasing SpamAssassin 3.1.10?
>>>
>>> Just curious,
>>>
>>>
>> I think so.. Sydney made a call for Theo
Doc Schneider wrote:
> Are we still planning on releasing SpamAssassin 3.1.10?
>
> Just curious,
>
>
I think so.. Sydney made a call for Theo to make a new release candidate
a week ago (8/11), but nothing happened.
I'm +1 on trying to make a new one.. the SVN head plus patch from Sydney
for 5574 w
Matt Kettler wrote:
> Mark Martinec wrote:
>
>>> However, in mine the difference when using a "stock" 3.2.3 is barely
>>> noticeable, going from 9 seconds to 8 seconds.
>>>
>>> Adding in a good handful of SARE rules (1365 extra rules, co
Mark Martinec wrote:
>> However, in mine the difference when using a "stock" 3.2.3 is barely
>> noticeable, going from 9 seconds to 8 seconds.
>>
>> Adding in a good handful of SARE rules (1365 extra rules, counting "score"
>> lines) makes the difference quite significant.
>>
>> Without "use bytes"
Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Shall we try again? 3.1.10 was ready for release but got blocked at the
> last moment by bug 5574. That now needs 2 more votes to commit to the
> 3.1 branch.
>
> -- sidney
>
>
Where can I find a version of the patch that applies to the previous
candidate 3.1.10 tarball
Justin Mason wrote:
> Theo Van Dinter writes:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 05:54:18PM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>>> as far as I know, if they're rules in the "rulesrc" tree, it's
>>> C-T-R; but rules in the "rules" dir are still R-T-C.
>>>
>>> I'd be happy to loosen this up, though.
>>>
Stephan Augsten wrote:
>
> Dear Sir or Madam,
>
>
>
> Gateway-Security is the main topic in the September-edition of our
> magazine Information Security (Germany). As a contra-part to
> commercial solutions we would like to report about Open Source
> solutions like Spamassassin, wherefore we need
Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Matt Kettler wrote, On 17/7/07 1:07 PM:
>
>> I'm having trouble getting 3.1.10 to pass "make test" as root. Passes
>> just fine as a non-root user.
>>
>
> Matt, can you please verify that you can apply the patch against
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Hi --
> 3.1.10 tarballs are available for testing:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~felicity/3110/
>
> By the way: per ASF policies, only PMC member votes are binding for
> a release, but we encourage everyone to download, test, and report
> any issues!
>
I'm having troubl
Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Matt Kettler wrote, On 17/7/07 1:19 PM:
>
>> I'm having trouble getting 3.1.10 to pass "make test" as root. Passes
>> just fine as a non-root user.
>>
>> Looks like the spamd "tell" based tests are the ones failin
(sorry for the repost.. MUA screwed up and sent from the wrong address)
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Hi --
> 3.1.10 tarballs are available for testing:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~felicity/3110/
>
> By the way: per ASF policies, only PMC member votes are binding for
> a release, but we encourage ev
Antonio Guirado Puerta wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We are testing spamassassin 3.2.0 in a Linux Fedora box with QMAIL as
> MTA. We would like to know if there is a module for caching the tests
> results. We have seen than the same mail (identified always with the
> same message-ID) is scanned multiples tim
Marc Perkel wrote:
>
>
> Matt Kettler wrote:
>>
>> Well, really this isn't a matter for spamassassin-devel. URIBL has it's
>> own mailing lists.
>>
>> That said, uribl.com is back up, and got professional DDOS mitigation
>> assistance from Pro
Marc Perkel wrote:
> OK - we need a plan. uribl.org is still down. We need a plan to make
> various anti-spam services immune from these kinds of attacks.
>
> So - who has some ideas?
>
>
Well, really this isn't a matter for spamassassin-devel. URIBL has it's
own mailing lists.
That said, uribl.co
Justin Mason wrote:
> ok, here's the proposed release announcement and tarballs.
>
> PMC members, please vote on these tarballs -- for a full release,
> we need 3 +1's from PMC members ;)
>
> --j.
Sorry I'm a bit behind:
Fedora Core 6-x64, net tests enabled:
All tests successful, 17 tests skip
41 matches
Mail list logo
