On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> From: David F. Skoll [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> > Yam? Should keep even the hardest core vegans happy and like ham, it
>> > rhymes with spam.
>>
>> :-) I love it. "Spam" is offensive to man
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 06/18/2004 10:53:22
>AM:
>
>> :-) I love it. "Spam" is offensive to many groups (Jews, Muslims,
>> vegetarians, people with taste buds) while "Yam" is sweet and
>> inoffensive.
>
>Sweet, inoffensive, and fried, at least her
On Thu, 27 May 2004, Bill Maidment wrote:
Patrick Morris wrote:
SOCKS with MIMEDefang? Nope, not gonna work.
I assume you're talking about accessing external POP and/or IMAP
servers? I assume so because I can't think of *any* good reason to
not force outgoing mail through your own SMTP servers
On Sun, 16 May 2004, Michael J. Pelletier wrote:
>Hello everyone,
>
>I am new to this list. First great job by all the developers on the project. I
>am running arround 97% spam / bad mime kills. I have a question. Which virus
>scanner does everyone suggest? I am usinf FileScan now.
>
I am coming
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Marcelo Souza wrote:
>Hi,
>
> I have just configure/compile the 2.42 and as a silly test I did,
>before install:
>
> perl mimedefang.pl -test
>
> And the following error ocurred:
>
>Can't locate warnings.pm in @INC (@INC contains:
>/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_p
On Wed, 2004-04-28 at 18:35, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004, Tim Pushor wrote:
>
> > You know, I was half expecting this answer ;-)
>
> Well, you know, gotta try...
>
So how much for a home user with 1-5 users ;).
--
Stephen John Smoogen[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Los Alamos Na
On Wed, 2004-04-28 at 12:26, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Hi, all.
>
> Is anyone using Trophie with MIMEDefang? It looks like Trend Micro doesn't
> give out enough docs for the Trophie author to maintain it. If it's
> a dead end, I will drop Trophie support.
>
> Yell if that will hurt you!
>
I was
On Wed, 2004-04-28 at 10:42, Nate Golnik wrote:
> >
> > Do you know what version ships w/ RHell 3.0? How does one check the
> > version?
> >
>
> RHEL 3 ships with perl-HTML-Parser-3.26-17.i386.rpm
>
> -Nate
To finish Nate's sentences (a habit I havent had the pleasure of in 3
years ;))...
On Tue, 2004-04-27 at 10:54, Kelson Vibber wrote:
> At 11:18 AM 4/26/2004, Nathan Martinez wrote:
> >Everything works fine for me, but now a few users want to be excluded
> >from the Spam scanning that I am doing.
>
> Because of the way milter works, you cannot skip MD on a per-user
> basis. The
On Mon, 2004-04-26 at 12:18, Nathan Martinez wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I have MD 2.39 setup with Sendmail 8.12.8 on a RedHat 9 machine.
> Everything works fine for me, but now a few users want to be excluded
> from the Spam scanning that I am doing. I have tried the solution
> described at:
>
On Mon, 2004-04-26 at 12:18, Nathan Martinez wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I have MD 2.39 setup with Sendmail 8.12.8 on a RedHat 9 machine.
> Everything works fine for me, but now a few users want to be excluded
> from the Spam scanning that I am doing. I have tried the solution
> described at:
>
On Thu, 2004-04-22 at 14:21, Stephane Lentz wrote:
> > We investigated several solutions : sandwich, (a real nightmare with
> > SMTP AUTH), milter (seems there's something in beta stage at trendmicro
> > site, but looks like ARRESTED DEVELLOPMENT), trophie (nothing has been
> > done to this project
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004, David F. Skoll wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Apr 2004, Kelson Vibber wrote:
>
>> Then SURBL should be fine. It's just a RHSBL, built from domains
>> advertised in spam rather than domains that (appear to) send it. A client
>> using SURBL just parses URLs out of the message and queries
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, David F. Skoll wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>> 1) It is ssloww. Since it isnt run milterized/daemonized.. you are
>> basically asking mimedefang to exec a new copy of it each time.
>
>There is a package called "Trophie&quo
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, David Minor wrote:
>Anyway ... to make a long question short, apparently Trend does not
>make a milterized version of Viruswall fpr linux, but I see that
>Mimedefang is able to call it. Could I start using this combination
>instead of our current one? Would I lose any func
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote:
>Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>>Ok, here are my lessons learned from my bad experience last month :).
>>
>>1) Get both good and bad emails.
>>2) Do not get too old of a folder of SPAM/HAM as it will weight older
>>
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote:
>Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>>Ok, here are my lessons learned from my bad experience last month :).
>>
>>1) Get both good and bad emails.
>>2) Do not get too old of a folder of SPAM/HAM as it will weight older
>>
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote:
>Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>>sa-learn --spam -C /etc/mail/spamassassin --showdots --mbox bad_file
>>sa-learn --ham -C /etc/mail/spamassassin --showdots --mbox good_file
>>
>Okay, so far so good on all replies. Now, ne
Now you just need to add a signed peer2peer networking scheme so that
you can share that info with hosts that are also on the network and then
4. profit.
On Thu, 8 Apr 2004, Ben Kamen wrote:
>
>Boy, as I sit here and watch the spammers try to
>
>A: use me as a relay (same IP, multiple tries)
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote:
>Ben Kamen wrote:
>
>> No no no, what IT needs to tell management is:
>>
>> We have 2 machines... one is way faster than the other... but it still
>> gets bogged... if we want to keep up the war on spam, what we need is
>> TWO really fast machines..
be bad.)
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote:
>Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>>sa-learn --spam -C /etc/mail/spamassassin --showdots --mbox bad_file
>>sa-learn --ham -C /etc/mail/spamassassin --showdots --mbox good_file
>>
>>
>Can the generated b
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Ben Kamen wrote:
>Well, I did it last night - I wrote an event driven TCL script that
>watches the mail log for sendmail's "RCPT Flood" message and then
>blackholes the IP address... then, after a user specified time limit, it
>will remove the blackhole automatically. Any a
On Thu, 2004-04-08 at 10:55, Frank Zhang wrote:
> Hi:
> When I ran:
>spamassassin --lint
>
> which check the sanity of sa-mimedefang.cf
> And I got the following message:
>
> failed to parse line in SpamAssassin configuration, skipping:
> auto_report_threshold 60
> failed to pars
I wrote a silly program to see what was happening.. and it doesnt seem
to be default perl (perse)
!/usr/bin/perl
#
# this is a silly test of vscan
#
open(SCANNER, "/etc/iscan/vscan -za -a /tmp/eicar* 2>&1|");
while () {
$msg .= $_
}
close(SCANNER);
print $? . "\n";
print $msg . "\n";
[EMAIL PR
On Tue, 2004-04-06 at 17:52, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] log]# rpm -q viruswall
> viruswall-3.8-7.LANL_rhel.3
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] log]# rpm -q mimedefang
> mimedefang-2.41-1.LANL_rhel.3
>
> For some reason, this combination worked with 2.35/2.39 without any
> p
On Wed, 2004-04-07 at 15:20, Mike Carlson wrote:
> Is there a way to configure MIMEDefang to include the original message
> as an attachment and not display it in the email with the results?
>
I think it depends on the version. The 2.39 version had a flag I needed
to add. The 2.41 version doesnt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] log]# rpm -q viruswall
viruswall-3.8-7.LANL_rhel.3
[EMAIL PROTECTED] log]# rpm -q mimedefang
mimedefang-2.41-1.LANL_rhel.3
For some reason, this combination worked with 2.35/2.39 without any
problems. However, now I keep getting tempfail actions in the
interpret_trend_code subro
On Tue, 2004-04-06 at 08:09, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> > I finally MIMEDefang up and running on my BSD box, but now
> > /var/log/maillog has the following error quite often:
> > Apr 5 14:14:56 hades mimedefang-multiplexor: Starting slave 1 (pid 277)
> > (2 running): Bringing slaves up to minSlaves
On Mon, 5 Apr 2004, Martin J. Dellwo wrote:
>I am trying to test out a system-wide bayesian filter. If something
>gets tagged because of the bayesian test, is there a keyword in
>X-Spam-Score I can look for so that I know it was triggered?
BAYES_xx (where xx is some number of the percentage)
On Fri, 2 Apr 2004, David F. Skoll wrote:
>Hi, All.
>
>At the office, we've (naturally) been talking about this patent.
>
>It's pretty clear to me that their claims are badly-written, overly-broad,
>and covered by substantial prior art. I'm sure a compentent legal and
>technical team could get th
On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Hi David,
>
>On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, David F. Skoll wrote:
>
>|you can add it into MIMEDefang. Just do your test in the Perl filter and
>|add to the $hits returned by spam_assassin_check. This is a quick-n-dirty
>|way to get it running; if it looks good,
You would need to contact the site that sent this to you. You can find
this by looking at the headers of the email (in various tools it is view
full headers under view or show. ) One of the machines in the
'Recieved:' list has installed mimedefang incorrectly as they should
have defined $AdminAdres
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 12:05, Alex S Moore wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 12:41, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 11:00, Justin wrote:
> > > On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Gwendolynn ferch Elydyr wrote:
> > >
> > > http://www.spamassassin.org/tests.html
&
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 12:05, Alex S Moore wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 12:41, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 11:00, Justin wrote:
> > > On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Gwendolynn ferch Elydyr wrote:
> > >
> > > http://www.spamassassin.org/tests.html
&
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 11:41, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> The second problem I was having is that 2 upstream sites are using
> mimedefang+spamassassin in their systems and for some reason I was
> seeing their score printed versus my own. When I commented out
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 11:00, Justin wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Gwendolynn ferch Elydyr wrote:
>
> > Further poking about yesterday showed that SA alone seems to be handing
> > out fairly reasonable scores, but SA in combination with MD is seeing
> > hideously low scoring. It doesn't look to me
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 11:23, Gwendolynn ferch Elydyr wrote:
> >
> > http://www.spamassassin.org/tests.html
>
> I'm familiar with the scoring - and in both cases, bayes and network
> scoring are enabled. Unfortunately the difference in scores is quite
> inconsistant, and doesn't seem to reflect tha
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 10:04, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Try running SpamAssassin as the "defang" user with the same configuation
> file used by MIMEDefang. There may be something in defang's home
> directory, Bayes data, etc. that could be causing the trouble.
>
At the moment there is only a
.razo
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 09:56, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
> > I am going to be turning off the auto-whitelist because it is now filled
> > with spam addresses due to the low scores.
>
> Ah! I never use auto-anything because it&#x
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 09:19, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
> > I took the time time to look at my fairly default home box last night,
> > and seem to be seeing the same things on the scores. Everything is Red
> > Hat 9 and I
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 08:18, Gwendolynn ferch Elydyr wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > Hmmm puremessage sticks it in /opt normally but I think can be put
> > elsewhere. What OS are you running? If you are running an RPM style
> > distro and want to check
On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 11:12, Gwendolynn ferch Elydyr wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, David F. Skoll wrote:
> > > The one change that has been made on this system is the addition of
> > > puremessage -
> >
> > I bet that's the culprit.
>
> I'm willing to bet that it is - but I can't seem to figure ou
On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 09:22, Gwendolynn ferch Elydyr wrote:
> Hola!
>
> I'm testing a mimedefang2.39/spamassassin2.63 combnation for catching
> spam, which was working nicely last week - catching the vast majority
> of spam, and otherwise behaving as desired.
>
> Now, I'm suddenly getting results
On Mon, 2004-03-22 at 12:54, Justin wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2004, Nels Lindquist wrote:
>
> > Which RedHat distribution are you using? PostgreSQL RPMs have been
> > included on the CD (though not necessarily installed by default) at
> > least as far back as 6.2, and if you want a more recent ve
ou can-not get it to work within 24
hours, fall back to 2.38 or so.
> Jason
>
> Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
> >What version of mimedefang are you running? I am seeing this quite a bit
> >with 2.40, but havent yet with 2.41 (not a long run though). I have also
> >not seen i
On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 21:32, Jason Granat wrote:
> Unfortunately it's happening every few minutes...
>
What version of mimedefang are you running? I am seeing this quite a bit
with 2.40, but havent yet with 2.41 (not a long run though). I have also
not seen it with 2.35 which is what I am still r
On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 13:53, Michael Sofka wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 March 2004 15:09, Royce Williams wrote:
>
> But, the circumstances of that monitoring are limited to repair,
> system integrity, trouble shooting in course of job, etc. Unless
> you post a "your actions may be monitored" banner.
On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 10:15, Michael Sofka wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 March 2004 10:43, Charles Mount wrote:
> > Thanks everyone. As a follow-up, with add_recipient or resend_message, is
> > the new recipient obvious to the other recipients, or is it like a bcc?
> >
> > As background on the legal iss
On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 09:35, David F. Skoll wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> MIMEDefang 2.41 is at http://www.mimedefang.org/node.php?id=1
>
> This is a pure bug-fix release; changelog follows.
>
Thanks David!
--
Stephen John Smoogen[EMAIL PROT
On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 07:56, Andrew J Caird wrote:
> Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 03/15/2004 06:11:14
> > PM:
> >
> > > I read somewhere that reiserfs is faster then ext3 on small file
> > > deletion/creation. Typical mail load.
> > > On a high load site, would typ
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 13:34, Michal Jankowski wrote:
> "Jon R. Kibler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The authoritative list of bogus IP address can be found at:
> > http://www.cymru.com/Documents/bogon-dd.html
>
> Please _do not_ use any of the unused/reserved IP ranges for any
> special
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 12:58, Steve Pfister wrote:
> Thanks to everyone who replied to my earlier message. I was able to make
> some progress, but I'm stuck again.
>
> I'm now getting:
>
> Can't locate loadable object for module Unix::Syslog.
>
> It looks like it's from the statement:
>
> bootst
I am trying to find where Mail::Audit in the code anymore.. the HOWTO
says to get it and install it.. but I have found that isnt possible due
to the fact it uses Razor::... calls and the Razor module is Razor2::..
(unless I am missing something obvious.)
Here is my list of perl CPAN modules th
Sorry for missing this earlier.. I was using an old HOWTO.
The section on Mail::Audit requires the following extra CPAN packages to
be downloaded and installed:
perl(Mail::ListDetector)
perl(Email::Valid)
perl(Razor::Agent)
Digest-Nilsimsa
Test-Simple
URI
Net-DNS
Time-HiRes
--
Stephen J
On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 10:31, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, Nate Carlson wrote:
>
> > I've installed 2.40, but I'm still seeing the following permissions in the
> > directories created under /var/spool/MIMEDefang:
>
> > drwx--3 defang defang 1.0k Mar 8 08:07 mdefang-
On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, Josh Kelley wrote:
>Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 2004-03-05 at 12:37, Josh Kelley wrote:
>>
>>
>>>1. Most mass-mailing viruses are sent directly by the virus, in which
>>>case no one will see any bounces generated.
>>&
On Sun, 7 Mar 2004, David F. Skoll wrote:
>On Fri, 5 Mar 2004, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>> Requires: sendmail > 0:8.12.0-1
>> Requires: perl-Digest-SHA1 >=0:2.00-1, perl-IO-stringy >= 0:1.212-1
>> Requires: perl-MIME-Base64 >= 0:2.20-1, pe
On Fri, 2004-03-05 at 14:27, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> I am working through the SPEC file from 2.38 and 2.40 to use 2.40 here
> and to sponsor it at Fedora.us.
>
> Here are my questions:
>
> What are the versions of the perl modules that should be used. There are
> the o
I am working through the SPEC file from 2.38 and 2.40 to use 2.40 here
and to sponsor it at Fedora.us.
Here are my questions:
What are the versions of the perl modules that should be used. There are
the ones on the mimedefang website, but several have newer versions than
that. Should I look at th
On Fri, 2004-03-05 at 12:37, Josh Kelley wrote:
> David F. Skoll wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 5 Mar 2004, Josh Kelley wrote:
> >
> >>he mimedefang-filter manpage still recommends using action_bounce
> >>rather than action_discard. Is action_bounce no longer recommended?
> >>
> >>
> >Right. I should f
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 14:10, Joseph Brennan wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 1:11 PM -0600 Michael Sims
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are legit reasons to use zip files and I want to preserve
> the functionality if we can. But some of our people lost major
> amounts of work by openin
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 13:53, James Miller wrote:
> >
> >
> > We just went through the same thing and have told people we will be
> > dropping zip files until we work out a sane way of 'scanning' ones that
> > are bad. Of course the .zip item is already being deprecated by the .txt
> > virii that te
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 12:23, Michal Jankowski wrote:
> "Michael Sims" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > We are seriously considering doing the same thing. It seems to me that the
> > virus writers are starting a shift from com|exe|bat|scr|pif to mainly zip
> > because they know the former is more
On Sun, 2004-02-29 at 18:56, Peter A. Cole wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:17:13 -0500
> "David F. Skoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, Peter A. Cole wrote:
> >
> > > Mar 1 09:02:15 jake mimedefang-multiplexor: Reap: Idle slave 1
> > > (pid 990) exited due to signal 11 (SLA
t
diverging too much from the default? Send changes to the mailing list,
etc?
At this point, I would not have it linked against clamav but would have
the logic in the spec file for someone to use it.
Stephen Smoogen
--
Stephen John Smoogen[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Los Alamos National Lab CCN
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Ron Peterson wrote:
>
>On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>> A couple of things.. do you have NFS mounts (I cant remember),
>
>Yes. A bunch.
Ok my guess from experience is that you may be seeing NFS timeouts and
the box is going crazy becau
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Ron Peterson wrote:
>
>On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, David F. Skoll wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Jonas Eckerman wrote:
>>
>> > With most soplutions using an embedded perl interpreter, the perl
>> > interpreter is never unlodaded. This means that if the perl
>> > interpreter itsel
The general solution I have found with applications having UTF-8
problems is to just have the system do itsself as a C machine with
/etc/sysconfig/i18n
On US systems /etc/sysconfig/i18n will look like:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] smooge]$ cat /etc/sysconfig/i18n
LANG="en_US.UTF-8"
SUPPORTED="en_US.UTF-8
On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 14:45, Ron Peterson wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, David F. Skoll wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, Ron Peterson wrote:
> >
> > > This system has 6GB RAM. On boot, after everything gets going, the system
> > > consumes just under 1GB. Over time, this useage is slowly creeping
>
On Mon, 2004-01-26 at 17:47, Mail Administrator wrote:
> Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > Could you send the following extra info to the list just so that people
> > can help:
> At this point, it is back to working. I shutdown sendmail and let it sit
> for a couple minutes (after
Could you send the following extra info to the list just so that people
can help:
ls -lad /var/spool/MIMEDefang
ls -lad /var/spool/MIMEDefang/*
also what is the OS and what is the perl
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004, Mail Administrator wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I came back from lunch today to hear people sayi
On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 15:02, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > This led me to wonder what would happen if I registered a bunch of high
> > valued MX records, ie:
>
> > Domain.com IN MX 10mailfilter.domain.com
>
> > Domain.com IN MX 100
73 matches
Mail list logo
