On 12/10/2012 06:34 PM, bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6875
Kevin A. McGrail kmcgr...@pccc.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
On 12/10/2012 10:48 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 12/10/2012 4:44 PM, Axb wrote:
Why isn't Zmailer dev requested to fix it?
I don't even know what zmailer is ;-)
Lowering our defenses for software which hardly anybody uses anymore
and which hasn't seen a release since 2007?
(ftp
On 12/10/2012 11:02 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 12/10/2012 4:58 PM, Axb wrote:
On 12/10/2012 10:48 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 12/10/2012 4:44 PM, Axb wrote:
Why isn't Zmailer dev requested to fix it?
I don't even know what zmailer is ;-)
Lowering our defenses for software which
On 12/10/2012 11:29 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012, Axb wrote:
Why isn't Zmailer dev requested to fix it?
Lowering our defenses for software which hardly anybody uses anymore
and which hasn't seen a release since 2007?
If the performance apart from zmailer is good in masscheck
?
Please wait a little before testing, let me make sure everything is alright.
ooops - ok - just ran a test and it was still taking 15 sec.
shoot me a direct mail when you need a test run.
Axb
be in the library and set through normal
configuration.
Normally this is achieved by the glue as with Amavis, MailScanner, using
the API or Fuglu using spamd results
IMO, spamc should remain simple and lightweight.
Axb
On 01/16/2013 09:15 PM, bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org wrote:
Please pay attention to any anomalies I may have missed ;)
Tomrrow I'll put this to work on test box which uses most of the
URIBL.pm lookup types (except SPF/DKIM) and report anything unusual.
10:46:02.508 [25217] dbg: rules: meta test MONEY_ATM_CARD has
undefined dependency 'DKIM_VALID'
thx
Axb
On 02/11/2013 10:59 AM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
Is this false positive? Very high score for one rule at least...
JKF_ANTI_PHISH is not a rule released by SA
Seems like it's a rule relased by MAilScanner's Anti-phish tool
On 03/05/2013 05:20 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 3/5/2013 7:18 AM, Axb wrote:
GUys
I'm seeing:
sandbox-felicity.pm
sandbox-hstern.pm
in /trunk/rules/
do we need them there? - I can't find anywhere they're being used.
comments? delete?
Aren't those autocreated or related to rulesrc
dangerously low)
comments? ideas? rants?
Axb
these rules to your own sandbox.
This will avoid suprises in the future.
We're masschecking lots of ancient bloat.
Thanks for your help in cleaning up this mess
Axb
On 03/06/2013 10:19 AM, Axb wrote:
Guys,
I'm disabling 0 hit/non perfomers/abandoned rules in hstern's sandbox.
make test spit out:
STOX_REPLY_TYPE_WITHOUT_QUOTES depends on __HS_SUBJ_RE_FW which is
nonexistent
STOX_REPLY_TYPE_WITHOUT_QUOTES depends on __HS_QUOTE which is nonexistent
On 03/06/2013 11:55 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 3/6/2013 4:54 AM, Axb wrote:
I've copied the dependencies to jm and jhardin sandboxes.
Suggest you rename them so they're unique to your rules and/or put
them in a commitername_dependencies.cf file
I like getting rid of the rules that aren't
On 05/29/2013 02:09 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 5/28/2013 8:17 AM, Daniel McDonald wrote:
Looking through the lists, I don't see my spam or ham corpus listed.
It's generating every day, with about 1459 spams and 14789 hams. The
script runs at 04:00 US Central time, or 23:00 UTC, and takes 28
On 05/31/2013 04:16 PM, bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org wrote:
Spent a couple of days working on the Henrik Krohns' Redis storage backend
for Bayes (introduced by Bug 6879), fixing some of its problems and then
contributing some improvements. Testing was under Redis 2.6.13, perl
On 05/31/2013 06:36 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
Axb,
Testing was under Redis 2.6.13, perl 5.18.0, on FreeBSD.
Are you using Pedro Melo's Redis Perl module?
http://search.cpan.org/~melo/Redis-1.961/
Indeed, still at 1.951 (from ports).
I see I need to update to a more recent version
be obeyed by Redis is to go with the current documentation
on bayes_auto_expire, i.e. not introducing arbitrary/unnecessary
exceptions, the POLA principle.
Yes I guess it's technically correct.
AXB, you should set bayes_auto_expire 1 everywhere right now or your old brain
will forget. ;-)
HMPF
be obeyed by Redis is to go with the current documentation
on bayes_auto_expire, i.e. not introducing arbitrary/unnecessary
exceptions, the POLA principle.
Yes I guess it's technically correct.
AXB, you should set bayes_auto_expire 1 everywhere right now or your old brain
will forget
not sure if this purely cosmetic or a bug or my lack of clue:
my init script's spamd options
SPAMDOPTIONS= --ipv4-only -d -c -m 30 --min-spare=4 -u spamd -x -q
on start, spamd log shows:
Jun 3 10:04:51 spamd03 spamd[18606]: spamd: server started on
IO::Socket::INET6 [127.0.0.1]:783 (running
On 06/13/2013 03:43 PM, David g wrote:
Hi All,
There is kind of a list that I can extract the URLs?
What do you want/expect to accomplish?
You question is very vague.
KEvin,
Please allow +- 7 days to test latest Bayes/Redis changes before cutting
the RC1.
Otherwise +1
On 06/18/2013 05:26 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Please vote to release 3.4.0-rc1.
Files at http://people.apache.org/~kmcgrail/devel/
Proposed Announcement follows.
Regards,
KAM
To:
On 06/18/2013 03:30 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 6/18/2013 9:17 AM, Axb wrote:
On 06/18/2013 03:07 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 6/18/2013 2:03 AM, Axb wrote:
KEvin,
Please allow +- 7 days to test latest Bayes/Redis changes before
cutting the RC1.
Otherwise +1
I'll wait on your vote
On 06/18/2013 03:58 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 6/18/2013 9:34 AM, Axb wrote:
To be clear, if the polish involves changing the code, then you are
asking for an rc2.
The changes should be reflected in RC1 to avoid ppl having to trash
their Bayes data due to a data format change. This would
On 06/18/2013 05:11 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
To be clear, if the polish involves changing the code, then you are
asking for an rc2.
The changes should be reflected in RC1 to avoid ppl having to trash
their Bayes data due to a data format change. This would not be very
kind and could scsare
On 06/19/2013 02:42 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
At the moment there are clearly more negative votes than positive with
good technical justification why. However, because I am seeing active
discussion and bugfixes regarding the feature that is the basis for the
request to move on to rc2, I'm
On 06/19/2013 01:11 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Axb skrev den 2013-06-18 15:34:
The changes should be reflected in RC1 to avoid ppl having to trash
their Bayes data due to a data format change.
so only redis is supported ?
scary :)
if the migrade need to drop bayes data, it no loose for me
On 06/19/2013 04:53 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 6/19/2013 10:26 AM, Randal, Phil wrote:
So, we wouldn't be able to unlearn historical emails (processed before
the upgrade), but there'd be few other side-effects?
Or am I missing something?
Best I can think of, these are the ramifications if
On 06/21/2013 08:03 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
Was distracted by Bug 6945 and other duties yesterday so
I didn't yet prepare other contributions for the announcement
text. Will do so, but for RC2 it's alright as it is.
[...] though I would be fine with README and similar
On 06/22/2013 08:51 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
is updates still same as for 3.3.2 ?, dont have checked yet, but this
was the only spot on trying rc2 here
same ruleset
On 07/09/2013 11:00 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
SpamAssassin version 3.3.0 has not had a rule update since 2013-07-07.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.1 has not had a rule update since 2013-07-07.
SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 has not had a rule update since 2013-07-07.
20130708: Spam or ham is
On 07/14/2013 01:00 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
On 2013-07-13 15:41, Axb wrote:
my weekly masdcheck which just ran a while ago spit a huge list of
Malformed UTF-8 character (unexpected non-continuation byte 0x6e,
immediately after start byte 0xf6) in transliteration (tr///) at
/data/masscheckwork
On 07/15/2013 12:15 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
Malformed UTF-8 character (unexpected non-continuation byte 0x6e,
immediately after start byte 0xf6) in transliteration (tr///) at
/data/masscheckwork/weekly_mass_check/masses/../lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm
line 627.
On a second thought,
On 10/18/2013 09:01 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
Only in spamassassin/: sandbox-felicity.pm
Only in spamassassin/: sandbox-hstern.pm
Only in spamassassin/: SIQ.pm
KAM,
iirc, these shouldn't be distributed
any ideas?
On 10/18/2013 10:50 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Friday, October 18, 2013 10:29 PM +0200 Axb axb.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 10/18/2013 09:01 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
Only in spamassassin/: sandbox-felicity.pm
Only in spamassassin/: sandbox-hstern.pm
Only in spamassassin/: SIQ.pm
On 11/08/2013 05:13 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 8 Nov 2013, bugzilla-dae...@issues.apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6580
Mark London m...@psfc.mit.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
dependencies to you sandbox or
appropiatly named sorted into rules/10_hasbase.cf
see make test results below.
I'll be commiting the change next week...
Thanks
Axb
t/basic_meta.t TO_EQ_FM_HTML_ONLY depends on
__FROM_LOWER which is nonexistent
T_SUBJ_BRKN_WORDNUMS
On 01/17/2014 05:29 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, Axb wrote:
Guys
I'll be disabling rules in 00_FVGT_File001.cf to get rid of some
ancient stuff before the 3.4 release
results for these rules weren't too good in 2006 - and not getting any
better.
If you are have dependencies
On 01/18/2014 11:18 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, Axb wrote:
Guys
I'll be disabling rules in 00_FVGT_File001.cf to get rid of some
ancient
stuff before the 3.4 release
results for these rules weren't too good in 2006
On 01/19/2014 11:52 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 1/19/2014 6:33 AM, Axb wrote:
On 01/18/2014 11:18 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, John Hardin wrote:
OK, I think I got them all cleaned up. Are you still getting
nonexistent-rule warnings?
Thanks John,
since öast svn update
running on a couple of test boxes -
all looks good, including Redis Bayes stuff relief
Centos 6.4 x64
spamassassin -V
SpamAssassin version 3.4.0-rc6
running on Perl version 5.10.1
my +1
On 02/05/2014 08:13 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On behalf of the PMC, the ASF SpamAssassin Project is
On 02/06/2014 06:05 PM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
See https://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/9383/changes
John
Pls copy __BUGGED_IMG to your sandbox.
Thx
On 02/06/2014 07:10 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Axb wrote:
On 02/06/2014 06:05 PM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
See https://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/9383/changes
John
Pls copy __BUGGED_IMG to your sandbox.
Done.
Can you wait until the weekend to start
On 02/06/2014 09:55 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 2/6/2014 1:10 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Axb wrote:
On 02/06/2014 06:05 PM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
See https://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/9383/changes
John
Pls copy __BUGGED_IMG to your sandbox
Karsten Bräckelmann is still active in bugzilla, and mailing list
(list moderation)
He's too young be retired.
Thx
Axb
On 02/07/2014 08:55 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 2/3/2014 5:58 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
One of the duties of the PMC is to maintain the quality of the
community
On 02/07/2014 09:39 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Yuck... so here's what a collission does while packaging a release:
WARNING: __BUGGED_IMG: renamed as
__BUGGED_IMG_rulesrc_sandbox_khopesh_20_khop_experimental_cf due to
collision with existing rule
disabled
+1
On 02/07/2014 10:41 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On behalf of the PMC, the ASF SpamAssassin Project is pleased to
announce the availability of our 3.4.0 subject to vote by the PMC per
the Project's ReleasePolicy
(http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ReleasePolicy). There are no
substantial
On 02/09/2014 01:24 AM, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Feb 2014, Axb wrote:
On 02/07/2014 09:39 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Yuck... so here's what a collission does while packaging a release:
WARNING: __BUGGED_IMG: renamed as
__BUGGED_IMG_rulesrc_sandbox_khopesh_20_khop_experimental_cf due
On 02/15/2014 05:12 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Best I can tell, our code is passing all tests but something with
jenkins is wonky. Anyone else take a look at the Console output and see
if you agree?
Original Message
Subject: Jenkins build is still unstable:
Could we PLEASE loose this rules file?
/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/khopesh/20_khop_sc_bug_6114.cf
We've been masschecking it for 4 years and it's tflags nopublish and
pretty dangerous to use in production if you have more than a man his
dog setup.
I see no reason to throw cycles/resources to
personal
channel for years yet don't run a masschecker yourself.
For these reason I ask you to remove the 20_khop_sc_bug_6114.cf file
from the sandbox
Thanks
Axb
On 02/18/2014 01:19 AM, Axb wrote:
Could we PLEASE loose this rules file?
/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/khopesh/20_khop_sc_bug_6114.cf
On 03/31/2014 04:46 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 31 Mar 2014, Axb wrote:
apparently in /trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/20_misc_testing.cf
t/basic_meta.t T_END_FUTURE_EMAILS depends on
__FB_IDENTITY which is nonexistent
Where are you seeing that?
__FB_IDENTITY is still
On 03/31/2014 11:35 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
I've been getting more missed spam lately. Ran
seek-phrases-in-corpus from SA svn. Output is here:
http://www.chaosreigns.com/sa/seek-2014-03-31.txt I'd
like to see some of these tested, particularly these:
On 04/02/2014 07:29 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
2) More automation of rule generation and testing Maybe modify
the mass check script to run seek-phrases-in-corpus, only on spams
below the default threshold? Upload results automatically, score them
automatically?
No need to modify
On 04/05/2014 06:42 PM, John Hardin wrote:
I'd rather not have to resort to hitting the masscheck system over the
head with the tflags publish cluebat, but I will if it keeps ignoring
these rules.
this would by very unwise and would create rule bloat as obviosuly the
corpus isn't seeing much
On 04/05/2014 06:59 PM, Axb wrote:
If Darxus sees so much of this type, why isn't he running a masschecker?
opps. sorry- I hand't seen he is indeed participating.
On 04/05/2014 07:33 PM, John Hardin wrote:
The masscheck spam corpus isn't pathetically small, but at the moment
it's *strongly* biased towards the traffic *you* are seeing. Your spam
is 490k+ of the 510k total corpus.
Should I feel guilty for only masschecking the last 21 days?
That was
t/basic_meta.t HEXHASH_WORD depends on
__LCL_ENV_AND_HDR_FROM_MATCH which is nonexistent
HEXHASH_WORD depends on __LCL_ENV_AND_HDR_FROM_MATCH which is nonexistent
HEXHASH_WORD depends on __LCL_ENV_AND_HDR_FROM_MATCH which is nonexistent
HEXHASH_WORD depends on
On 06/11/2014 05:52 PM, Joe Quinn wrote:
On 6/11/2014 11:44 AM, John Hardin wrote:
Folks:
I just came across a PayPal phish that has a potentially useful
indicator: the domain referenced in the URI has no MX record defined,
so it cannot accept email.
Would it be worth another DNS query in
On 06/11/2014 07:40 PM, John Hardin wrote:
That, too, but that wouldn't be a part of the URIBL plugin, so this
check sounds reasonable for whatever's doing DNS checks on those bits as
well.
Point being, a blanket every URI in an email must have an MX record
is not correct, but a little extra
SVN Rev 1602674
t/uri_text.t .. 1/682 # Failed test 660 in
t/uri_text.t at line 54 fail #29
failure: did find /^http://www.example.foo$/
# Failed test 671 in t/uri_text.t at line 54 fail #40
failure: did find /zai6Vuwi/
t/uri_text.t .. Failed 2/682
On 06/17/2014 08:40 PM, spamassas...@lcwsoft.com wrote:
On 17.06.2014 14:09, RW wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:03:31 -0230
spamassas...@lcwsoft.com wrote:
originating_ip_headers X-WebmailclientIP
Actually, that might meet my needs in a better way, as I could add a
custom header and then set
On 06/17/2014 09:13 PM, Axb wrote:
On 06/17/2014 08:40 PM, spamassas...@lcwsoft.com wrote:
On 17.06.2014 14:09, RW wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:03:31 -0230
spamassas...@lcwsoft.com wrote:
originating_ip_headers X-WebmailclientIP
Actually, that might meet my needs in a better way, as I
On 06/18/2014 07:34 AM, spamassas...@lcwsoft.com wrote:
On 17.06.2014 17:25, Axb wrote:
On 06/17/2014 09:13 PM, Axb wrote:
On 06/17/2014 08:40 PM, spamassas...@lcwsoft.com wrote:
On 17.06.2014 14:09, RW wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:03:31 -0230
spamassas...@lcwsoft.com wrote
On 06/18/2014 05:38 PM, spamassas...@lcwsoft.com wrote:
On 18.06.2014 03:17, Axb wrote:
On 06/18/2014 07:34 AM, spamassas...@lcwsoft.com wrote:
On 17.06.2014 17:25, Axb wrote:
On 06/17/2014 09:13 PM, Axb wrote:
On 06/17/2014 08:40 PM, spamassas...@lcwsoft.com wrote:
On 17.06.2014 14:09, RW
On 06/24/2014 06:00 PM, Axb wrote:
don't understand why you're replicating URIBL.pm features like
uridnsbl_skip_domain
blacklist_uri_host
whitelist_uri_host
and not using URIBL.pm as base for your plugin instead of what looks
like somethign based on URIDetail.pm which wasn't designed to play
On 06/24/2014 07:28 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Axb wrote:
I just don't understand how this can be simpler better to use than a
cheap and easy to use rlbldnsd instance.
I see the appeal of this if the number of desired domains/netblocks to
check is very small and the SA admin
YAY!
Rule QA is back!!!
Thanks so much Kevin...
We owe you a huge keg!
On 07/26/2014 11:00 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
20140725: Spam and ham are above threshold of
150,000:http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?daterev=20140725
20140725: Spam: 479092, Ham: 160064
?
both ham spam are above threshold
Received: from DUB004-OMC4S34.hotmail.com (dub004-omc4s34.hotmail.com
[157.55.2.109])
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308
This is what something like an undisclosed recipients looks like.
Imo, this rule scored with 3.5 should be purged. It's a waste of cycles
On 07/30/2014 02:57 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Hmm,
Spotchecking Ruleqa doesn't show this misfiring at all:
http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20140729-r1614286-n/TO_NO_BRKTS_MSFT/detail
I have also got zero hits in my ham corpora.
Suggest adding hit to your ham corpora and we check on it
On 07/30/2014 03:41 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 7/30/2014 9:19 AM, Axb wrote:
On 07/30/2014 02:57 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Hmm,
Spotchecking Ruleqa doesn't show this misfiring at all:
http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20140729-r1614286-n/TO_NO_BRKTS_MSFT/detail
I have also got zero hits
The concept of this rule just tells me that it's wrong..
meta __TO_NO_BRKTS_MSFT __TO_NO_ARROWS_R
!__TO_UNDISCLOSED (__ANY_OUTLOOK_MUA || __MIMEOLE_MS)
welcome to 2014
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail
where is the exception for that? .-)
and if you add it so what? even
On 07/30/2014 04:52 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 7/30/2014 10:50 AM, Axb wrote:
The concept of this rule just tells me that it's wrong..
meta __TO_NO_BRKTS_MSFT __TO_NO_ARROWS_R
!__TO_UNDISCLOSED (__ANY_OUTLOOK_MUA || __MIMEOLE_MS)
welcome to 2014
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows
--- 20_misc_testing.cf (revision 1614687)
+++ 20_misc_testing.cf (revision 1614688)
@@ -1572,5 +1572,6 @@
uriURI_IP_UNSUB
m;^[a-z]+://(?:\d+\.){3}\d+/.*unsubscribe;i
describe URI_IP_UNSUB IP-address unsubscribe URI
+tflags URI_IP_UNSUB publish
On 07/30/2014 05:55 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 7/30/2014 11:45 AM, Axb wrote:
--- 20_misc_testing.cf(revision 1614687)
+++ 20_misc_testing.cf(revision 1614688)
@@ -1572,5 +1572,6 @@
uriURI_IP_UNSUB m;^[a-z]+://(?:\d+\.){3}\d+/.*unsubscribe;i
describe
On 07/30/2014 09:04 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 7/30/2014 12:15 PM, John Hardin wrote:
According to the wiki, rules without an explicit tflags publish
line are never published,
https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/SaUpdateBackend
...which isn't actually how it behaves, as there are quite a
On 09/12/2014 02:55 PM, Joe Quinn wrote:
I just saw a false positive coming from this rule, which managed to get
a score of 2.4 from just one word:
body BANG_GUAR /\bguaranteed?\!/i
I put in a cap of 1.0 which should keep RuleQA from going nuts with that
rule.
Wow - that
On 09/12/2014 02:55 PM, Joe Quinn wrote:
I just saw a false positive coming from this rule, which managed to get
a score of 2.4 from just one word:
body BANG_GUAR /\bguaranteed?\!/i
I put in a cap of 1.0 which should keep RuleQA from going nuts with that
rule.
you added
CC||jhar...@impsec.org
--- Comment #4 from John Hardin jhar...@impsec.org ---
(In reply to AXB from comment #1)
SMF sandbox:
header __freemail_hdr_replyto eval:check_freemail_header('Reply-To:addr')
20_freemail.cf
header
Unless somebody thinks this a terribly bad idea, I'll be adding a
20_bayes_ignore_header.cf to the SA default rules to replace the few
(unmantained) bayes_ignore_header entries in local.cf
comments?
On 10/04/2014 03:18 PM, RW wrote:
On Sat, 04 Oct 2014 11:32:17 +0200
Axb wrote:
Unless somebody thinks this a terribly bad idea, I'll be adding a
20_bayes_ignore_header.cf to the SA default rules to replace the few
(unmantained) bayes_ignore_header entries in local.cf
comments?
I'd like
...
Suggestions, comments, etc on/offlist are very welcome
Axb
On 11/04/2014 03:17 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 11/3/2014 9:03 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Does no work with --progress and --showdots
Works in 3.4.0
Seems to be a buffered output problem ?
Weird. I don't show any code diffs (documentation only) between
sa-learn.raw in 3.4.0 to trunk.
No
On 11/07/2014 01:41 PM, Jan Hejl wrote:
May I ask some to share my.cnf conf for bayes database? And database
structure?
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/trunk/sql/README.bayes
though its not exactly new
be carefull to choose the right bayes_store_module
If you're a high
]\.[pattern]\.TLDLIST/
so it applies to all TLDs
thx
Axb
bayes_token_ttl 5d
What are the settings on that cluster?
Axb
On 02/13/2015 08:51 AM, Jan Hejl wrote:
Whups. 62M :-D Sorry, my mistake. But still ...
what counts is:
used_memory_human:49.70M
seems amazingly little data.
Dne 13.2.2015 v 08:35 Axb napsal(a):
Jan,
could you please post your # Memory section of
redis-cli info
and
sa-learn
On 02/13/2015 11:12 AM, Jan Hejl wrote:
Dne 13.2.2015 v 09:47 Axb napsal(a):
On 02/13/2015 08:51 AM, Jan Hejl wrote:
Whups. 62M :-D Sorry, my mistake. But still ...
what counts is:
used_memory_human:49.70M
seems amazingly little data.
Why not?
no scientific reason - in my setup I'd
Jan,
could you please post your # Memory section of
redis-cli info
and
sa-learn --dump magic
On 02/13/2015 08:29 AM, Jan Hejl wrote:
Hi Quannah,
we use it on heavy loaded infrstructure - 10M messsages per day and the
RES is 62k VIRT 130M. There has to be something wrong with his
I see that v341.pre contains
# TxRep - Reputation database that replaces AWL
loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::TxRep
imo, this should NOT be enabled by default
great!
Thanks
Axb
PS: Hope you find time to get ruleqa back to normal operation.
On 01/05/2015 10:50 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
FYI that we appear back online with Jenkins.
regards,
KAM
Forwarded Message
Subject: [jira] [Closed] (INFRA-8525) Solaris1
On 01/12/2015 11:19 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 1/12/2015 2:12 PM, Axb wrote:
I see that v341.pre contains
# TxRep - Reputation database that replaces AWL
loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::TxRep
imo, this should NOT be enabled by default
Why not? We've been testing it for months
On 02/09/2015 01:22 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Would someone care to write up some ideas for the project that are good
for new programmers to be sponsored by GSoC on the project?
I've done it before but always appear to write scary ideas ;-)
The couple of ideas I have are hardly for someone
On 02/13/2015 01:57 PM, Jan Hejl wrote:
Dne 13.2.2015 v 13:31 Henrik Krohns napsal(a):
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:12:38AM +0100, Jan Hejl wrote:
Dne 13.2.2015 v 09:47 Axb napsal(a):
On 02/13/2015 08:51 AM, Jan Hejl wrote:
Whups. 62M :-D Sorry, my mistake. But still ...
what counts
Wanted to updated RegistrarBoundaries.pm
make test fails with
t/uri_text.t .. 1/683 # Failed test 345 in
t/uri_text.t at line 47 fail #345
failure: did not find /^http://example.tp$/
# Failed test 626 in t/uri_text.t at line 47 fail #626
failure: did not find
On 03/22/2015 02:28 PM, Axb wrote:
Wanted to updated RegistrarBoundaries.pm
make test fails with
t/uri_text.t .. 1/683 # Failed test 345 in
t/uri_text.t at line 47 fail #345
failure: did not find /^http://example.tp$/
# Failed test 626 in t/uri_text.t at line 47 fail #626
Guys,
Kevin (BCC) is trying to restore the bad rule reports.
If anybody still has such a msg, could you please mail me a pristine
.eml or the headers, offlist?
Thanks
Axb
would have wanted (in
production), I've had no issues so you have my +1
still need to get my feed wet with bayes_token_sources
would also like to see a sample rule using check_rbl_from_domain
(using DBL's dbl.spamhaus.org. A 127.0.1.2 )
Axb
following blocklist providers have implemented a Block Notification
Rule with SpamAssassin: "
thx
Axb
101 - 200 of 232 matches
Mail list logo
