Hi,
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 1:12 AM, - kd6...@yahoo.com wrote:
--- On Mon, 2/1/10, ml ml mliebher...@googlemail.com wrote:
has anyone got some hints for me how to write a auto reply /
vacation script? Or is there already such a project out ...
Yes: DON'T. There are enough problems with
On 2-2-2010 8:39, ml ml wrote:
Yes: DON'T. There are enough problems with existing autoresponders out there.
idd do not try to reinvent the wheel, there are plenty of autoresponders
out there, some better than others, but nearly all of them have their
quirks.
well, there is the feature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 2010-02-02 08:39 schrieb ml ml:
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 1:12 AM, - kd6...@yahoo.com wrote:
--- On Mon, 2/1/10, ml ml mliebher...@googlemail.com wrote:
has anyone got some hints for me how to write a auto reply /
vacation script? Or is
Hello,
I have noticed an increase of spam messages with rather large
binary attachments (pdf, images) lately. They slip through undetected,
because our size limit for SpamAssassin checks is at 100K.
I'd rather avout to bump up this threshold to say 5M in order to
catch those spams too.
Is there
Hi!
On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 21:26 +0100, Michiel Brandenburg wrote:
[...]
I recently noticed the relay_is_* functions within mimdefang.pl do not
playing nice with ipv6 addresses. This patch fixes it. Not that a lot
of mail is running ipv6 over here but there is always hope :)
# taken from
- Original Message -
From: - kd6...@yahoo.com
To: mimedefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 12:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Mimedefang] mimedefang letting some spams through...why?
Your problem is that SA is being called more than once.
ok thanks, do you mean
On 2-2-2010 11:34, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
# taken from Net::IP, and converted to use no external, and handle no padding
Hmm, any special reason for not using Net::IP directly?
Or did I miss something?
That could be done without a problem but I did not want to bloat
mimedefang.pl anymore
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010 11:50:52 -
Tony t...@freeuk.com wrote:
- Original Message - From: - kd6...@yahoo.com
To: mimedefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 12:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Mimedefang] mimedefang letting some spams through...why?
Your problem is
- Original Message
From: Tony t...@freeuk.com
To: mimedefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com
Sent: Tue, February 2, 2010 5:50:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Mimedefang] mimedefang letting some spams through...why?
- Original Message - From: -
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 12:11
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
sorry for the late reply. Been out of the office for most of the last
two weeks.
Am 2010-01-20 23:22 schrieb Cliff Hayes:
The list rejected my reply too ... so sending directly to you.
I'll try CCing the list again. Perhaps it'll change it's
ml ml wrote:
has anyone got some hints for me how to write a auto reply /
vacation script? Or is there already such a project out there which
does that kind of stuff?
I agree with the sentiment that MIMEDefang is the wrong place to
do this; it should be done by the final delivery agent.
I
Michiel Brandenburg wrote:
+if( $ip[$_] =~ /\./ ) {
+# ipv4 mapped as ipv6
+my @extraOcts = unpack('H4H4', pack('C4C4C4C4', split(/\./,
Actually, the Perl code will never see an IPv6-mapped IPv4 address, because
the mimedefang.c code converts such an address to
Tilman Schmidt wrote:
--- On Mon, 2/1/10, ml ml mliebher...@googlemail.com wrote:
has anyone got some hints for me how to write a auto reply /
vacation script? Or is there already such a project out ...
Yes: DON'T. There are enough problems with existing autoresponders out there.
well,
But I don't need that. If you are going to write your own, I'd encourage
you to study the vacation(1) source code; it contains measures that
eliminate most of the worst auto-responder behaviour.
Actually, I found the vacation program to be woefully problematic in
replying to spam, lists, etc.
Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Actually, I found the vacation program to be woefully problematic in
replying to spam, lists, etc.
Ah. Well, we stop our spam at the server, so vacation(1) never sees it.
I can see it would be a big problem if you run a tagging-only spam filter.
AFAIK, vacation(1)
Ah. Well, we stop our spam at the server, so vacation(1) never sees it.
I can see it would be a big problem if you run a tagging-only spam filter.
Having yet to see a 100% accurate spam filter, you are correct. I run a
tagging-only spam filter and strongly recommend the use of tagging-only
Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Having yet to see a 100% accurate spam filter, you are correct. I run a
tagging-only spam filter and strongly recommend the use of tagging-only
spam filters. Philosophical debate and I'm sure we both have strong and
valid opinions not worthy arguing here ;-)
Well,
Hello List,
i am currently playing around the mimedefang-filter example script
which is included in almost all distributions.
What i am trying to do now is to get the required spamassassin score per domain.
Here is my code:
http://pastebin.com/m690faaa2 (ok, this is a terrible
proof-of-concept
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 11:15:35AM -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
Somewhat OT... has anyone had experience with Mail::Audit to replace
procmail?
http://search.cpan.org/~rjbs/Mail-Audit-2.225/lib/Mail/Audit.pm
I *detest* the procmail syntax, and keep meaning One Of These Days
to poke around with
--- On Tue, 2/2/10, Tony t...@freeuk.com wrote:
- Original Message - From: - kd6...@yahoo.com
Your problem is that SA is being called more than
once.
ok thanks, do you mean every email is being scanned twice?
how do you know that?
There are SA-generated headers inserted into your
On 2-2-2010 19:01, David F. Skoll wrote:
In other words, what is the difference between an SMTP client coming
from :::192.168.10.1 or 192.168.10.1 ?
or :::c0a8:a01. Well not a lot I would guess except that one is ipv6
the other ipv4. Guess it all depends on semantics .. probably
Michiel Brandenburg wrote:
Well database and code could only assume that they get ipv6 addresses.
Ah, true. Well... the database I use (PostgreSQL) has a network
type that accepts both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. I'm not sure what the
database I don't use (MySQL) does (or if it even has a
- Original Message -
From: - kd6...@yahoo.com
To: mimedefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Mimedefang] mimedefang letting some spams through...why?
--- On Tue, 2/2/10, Tony t...@freeuk.com wrote:
- Original Message - From: -
--- On Tue, 2/2/10, David F. Skoll d...@roaringpenguin.com wrote:
...
Actually, the Perl code will never see an IPv6-mapped IPv4 address,
because the mimedefang.c code converts such an address to pure
IPv4:
/* Convert IPv6-mapped IPv4 address to pure IPv4.
That is:
- wrote:
I really don't like that code, even if it happens to work.
Patches accepted. Get your patch in while 2.68 is still in beta... :)
Regards,
David.
___
NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above
message, it is NULL
On 2-2-2010 20:49, David F. Skoll wrote:
Ah, true. Well... the database I use (PostgreSQL) has a network
type that accepts both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. I'm not sure what the
database I don't use (MySQL) does (or if it even has a network type.)
Yea I noticed that too MySQL can store ipv4 (as a
On Die, 2010-02-02 at 13:09 +0100, Michiel Brandenburg wrote:
On 2-2-2010 11:34, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
# taken from Net::IP, and converted to use no external, and handle no
padding
Hmm, any special reason for not using Net::IP directly?
Or did I miss something?
That could be done
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:22:40PM +0100, Michiel Brandenburg wrote:
Btw .. (this might hurt) any word on integrating File-VirusScan into
mimedefang :) ? As I remember there was some talk about it way back.
Heh... not for the next release. Or, depending on your point of view,
it's already
You missed the point. You're scanning every message with SA more than once (at
least twice if not more). As the answer doesn't change, you're doing
unnecessary work.
___
NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above
message,
Try this regex for detecting an IPv4-compatible IPv6 address:
... =~ qr/^:::(\d{1,3}(\.\d{1,3}){3})$/i ...
That should be more precise than strchr(...,'.'); $1 should be the IPv4
address that was extracted.
___
NOTE: If there is a
--- On Tue, 2/2/10, Michiel Brandenburg a...@xepa.nl wrote:
...
Oh no .. don't tell me there is another conversion coming
up .. damn there goes my holiday.
If you're calling it a holiday instead of a vacation, you've already
converted (or have been converted). ;-)
SpamAssassin only considers the text parts of a message when deciding
whether it is too big to process, so the presence of large non-text
MIME attachments (e.g., images) should not prevent SA from doing its
thing when the total amount of text is less than 100K.
However, if you are like me and
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 08:06:45PM -0800, Jeff Makey wrote:
SpamAssassin only considers the text parts of a message when deciding
whether it is too big to process, so the presence of large non-text
MIME attachments (e.g., images) should not prevent SA from doing its
thing when the total amount
33 matches
Mail list logo
