On 23/10/11 21:38, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> I really wonder what the benefits of manually building exim, spamassassin
> and clamav are. There is really no problem with using the binary exim
> packages and using a hand built configuration in
> /etc/exim4/exim4.conf. Handbuilt packages have a very st
Dave Restall - System Administrator,,, wrote:
[...]
> As a long time Debian User (1996) may I humbly suggest that you
> ditch Debian's implementation, download the latest versions of exim,
> spamassassin and clamav from the web and build them all from source.
> It all just works as per the manual
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi,
Am Mi den 12. Okt 2011 um 10:35 schrieb Mark Goodge:
> >Show us the Exim configuration that you're using to call SpamAssassin.
>
> Isn't that what /etc/exim4/sa-exim.conf does?
No.
> If not, what part of exim's configuration handles its inter
Hi Mark,
> I have what seems to me to be a rather weird problem. My users are
> complaining that they are receiving spam, which contains the following
> spamassassin content warning:
Snip...
> So - why is this spam getting through instead of being rejected? Am I
> missing something obvious he
On 12/10/2011 11:04, Dominic Benson wrote:
Have a look in the configuration file used by Exim to see what's in there.
In Debian and similar, it is actually at
/var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated, and built out of *either*
/etc/exim4/exim4.conf.template *or* /etc/exim4/conf.d/ - sa-exim puts a
c
On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Mark Goodge wrote:
|
| Isn't that what /etc/exim4/sa-exim.conf does?
|
Blimey - amazed "sa-exim" is still in use somewhere.
IIRC everything needed to call SpamAssassin during the SMTP dialog has
been built into Exim for about 7 years...
--
## List details at https://li
On 12/10/11 10:56, Mark Goodge wrote:
You need to configure Exim to reject the email. Exim asks SpamAssassin
if the email is spam or not, but SpamAssassin doesn't have the
capability of rejecting mail, it only has the capability of reporting on
whether or not the message is spa
On 12/10/11 10:39, exim-us...@lists.grepular.com wrote:
On 12/10/11 10:35, Mark Goodge wrote:
You need to configure Exim to reject the email. Exim asks SpamAssassin
if the email is spam or not, but SpamAssassin doesn't have the
capability of rejecting mail, it only has the capability of reporti
On 12/10/2011 10:39, exim-us...@lists.grepular.com wrote:
On 12/10/11 10:35, Mark Goodge wrote:
You need to configure Exim to reject the email. Exim asks SpamAssassin
if the email is spam or not, but SpamAssassin doesn't have the
capability of rejecting mail, it only has the capability of repor
On 12/10/11 10:35, Mark Goodge wrote:
>> You need to configure Exim to reject the email. Exim asks SpamAssassin
>> if the email is spam or not, but SpamAssassin doesn't have the
>> capability of rejecting mail, it only has the capability of reporting on
>> whether or not the message is spam.
>>
>>
On 12/10/2011 10:15, exim-us...@lists.grepular.com wrote:
You need to configure Exim to reject the email. Exim asks SpamAssassin
if the email is spam or not, but SpamAssassin doesn't have the
capability of rejecting mail, it only has the capability of reporting on
whether or not the message is s
On 12/10/11 10:10, Mark Goodge wrote:
> I have what seems to me to be a rather weird problem. My users are
> complaining that they are receiving spam, which contains the following
> spamassassin content warning:
>
> --
> Sp
Hi,
I have what seems to me to be a rather weird problem. My users are
complaining that they are receiving spam, which contains the following
spamassassin content warning:
--
Spam detection software, running on the system
ROGERS Richard wrote:
>
> Alternatively - or additionally - for client side filtering, you can
> always use a more obviously site-specific header, e.g.
>
> add_header = X-MyOrganisation-Spam-Score: $spam_score
> ($spam_bar)
That's what I do as well, but you should always use X-Spam-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ian P. Christian wrote:
>> Frank DeChellis wrote:
>>> This line is in all my email:
>>>
>>> X-Spam-Score: 9.0 (+)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> are you sure that header is added by *your* mail server?
>>
>> it's possible it's being added by others, and therefore your spamd
>
Ian P. Christian wrote:
> Frank DeChellis wrote:
>> This line is in all my email:
>>
>> X-Spam-Score: 9.0 (+)
>>
>>
>
> are you sure that header is added by *your* mail server?
>
> it's possible it's being added by others, and therefore your spamd
> checking isn't actaully checking that
Frank DeChellis wrote:
> This line is in all my email:
>
> X-Spam-Score: 9.0 (+)
>
>
are you sure that header is added by *your* mail server?
it's possible it's being added by others, and therefore your spamd
checking isn't actaully checking that result, but its own obviously.
It's not
This line is in all my email:
X-Spam-Score: 9.0 (+)
Well, this one with 9.0 got through.
On 10/12/07 9:15 AM, "Renaud Allard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Frank DeChellis wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We're using Exim 4.67 with Spam Assassin 3.something
>>
>> Here is the line in my confi
Frank DeChellis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're using Exim 4.67 with Spam Assassin 3.something
>
> Here is the line in my config for exim to reject the spam based on a score
> of 6.0:
>
> denymessage = This message scored $spam_score spam points
> spam = nobody:true/defer_ok
> condi
Hi,
We're using Exim 4.67 with Spam Assassin 3.something
Here is the line in my config for exim to reject the spam based on a score
of 6.0:
denymessage = This message scored $spam_score spam points
spam = nobody:true/defer_ok
condition = ${if > {$spam_score_int}{60}{1}{0}}
M
20 matches
Mail list logo
