On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 08:33:15PM -0700, Michael Bell wrote:
> These are all new:
>
> 1. Time::Hires required (or at least reported to be required when I
> run Perl makefile.pl)
Yeah, we're still trying to make it optional.
The code is designed to work without it, just remove "use Time::Hires"
Hi,
I'd like to keep some incoming spam for further experiments, and I'd
like to keep the e-mails without the SA markup. Is there some
spamassassin switch disabling it? I know I can remove the markup with
-d, but the man page says the result "will not be exactly identical",
and anyway it seems pe
I wrote:
>> Thanks to Galeon (View menu, Encoding option, Korean option, EUC-KR
>> option)
"Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why didn't galeon realize that on its own?
> (I saw you put the tag in)
I don't know. The most likely cause is that I don't have the tag
right or I
On Saturday 15 June 2002 12:31 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Michael Moncur wrote:
> MM> score ASCII_FORM_ENTRY -1.660
>
> Looks like lots of false positives on the appended lines at the bottom of
> Sourceforge mailing list messages. This score should probably be pumped up
> a little
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 12:31:31PM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> I think the rule needs to be adjusted to not trigger on 3 words' presence in the
> message, since "asian" and "hardcore" can occur in legitimate messages.
> Instead, it should trigger based on %age of words which are in the list, so
I followed the info in regards to setting up the SQL db lookup. I
uncommneted out the lines in /etc/spamassassin/10_misc.cf (i'm using debian)
that pertain to the db connection. When I send a test msg to it, I see
nothing in the spamd debug output about contacting the db.
the db, and tables are
I checked all the files, and indeed SA 2.30 refers to tests which
have been removed or changed
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
Hello,
* Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [16.06.02 06:18]:
> The only other thing I can think of offhand is, does the procmail process
> perhaps have its resource limits set smaller than the interactive shell?
Well, if I use spamc/spamd it works well, so you are probably right. So I
will do
After upgrading from 2.20 to 2.30 I now have lots of this message in
my syslog :
Jun 15 23:55:50 dman spamd[25978]: Still running as root: user not specified, not
found, or set to root. Fall back to nobody.
Ok, I understand what it means, but it is wrong. spamc is run as user
'mail', and wi
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Philipp Grau wrote:
> * Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [15.06.02 20:09]:
> > Let's see the procmail rule. It might be procmail that's running out of
> > memory -- there is a known allocation bug in procmail 3.22.
>
> Ok. here we go:
Hmm, that doesn't look like something
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Michael Bell wrote:
> Bareword found where operator expected at (eval 9) line 192, near
> "25FREEMEGS_URL_rawbody_test"
> (Missing operator before FREEMEGS_URL_rawbody_test?)
The only reference to 25FREEMEGS is in rules/30_text_fr.cf -- and that
line should be delete
I am, for example, using a ~/.procmailrc file to have mailing list mail put
in the right IMAP folder. If sieve can do this, and allow for recipes to be
defined at the userlevel, then I'm all for it. If so, then how?
--
David B. Bitton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.codenoevil.com
Code Made Fresh Daily
These are all new:
1. Time::Hires required (or at least reported to be required when I
run Perl makefile.pl)
2. All of the following errors reported in -D mode
(I've shown the full output but there are many errors reported
below that never showed up before.)
All of this was installed according
I'm using Promail for user level mailbox sorting. Wouldn't your method
completely remove that from the mix?
--
David B. Bitton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.codenoevil.com
>
> Code Made Fresh DailyT
> - Original Message -
> From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "David B. Bitton" <[
get rid of the procmail link, plug in spamcheck.py as the lmtp connection
for postfix, and have spamcheck.py then dump to cyrus' lmtp server for
filtering (sieve) and delivery ...
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, David B. Bitton wrote:
> Looks like I found the problem w/ Cyrus reporting invalid header. I
Looks like I found the problem w/ Cyrus reporting invalid header. I ran a
piece of testmail through Spam Assassin and noticed:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jun 15 22:39:08 2002
and this is not RFC 822 compliant, and therefore Cyrus rejects it. If you
add:
:0 fwh
| formail -I "From "
before yo
Hello,
* Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [15.06.02 20:09]:
> Let's see the procmail rule. It might be procmail that's running out of
> memory -- there is a known allocation bug in procmail 3.22.
Ok. here we go:
,[ /home/phgrau/.procmailrc ]
| MAILDIR=/home/phgrau/Mail
| LOGFILE=$MAILDIR
On Sat, 2002-06-15 at 14:31, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> MM> - Not as weird as all that, apparently
> MM> score MSGID_CHARS_WEIRD -2.178
>
> Looks like mail servers (Exchange and Netscape mail server) sometimes
> create
> message ids which look like:
>
> Message-Id:
>
> I don't know w
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 06:14:36PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
| "Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| > I got a piece of korean spam yesterday that SA (2.20) didn't mark at
| > all. It was multipart/alternative with a text/plain and text/html
| > segment both koi8-r. My ok_l
"Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I got a piece of korean spam yesterday that SA (2.20) didn't mark at
> all. It was multipart/alternative with a text/plain and text/html
> segment both koi8-r. My ok_locales setting is "en".
You can also add "ok_languages en" to your config
Michael Moncur wrote:
MM> When a new release comes out I like to be anal-retentive and go through the
MM> GA second-guessing its scores. This is my report for 2.30.
A valuable service we've come to count on.
MM> - RATWARE must be fixed, it was negative last time
MM> score RATWARE
I've installed SpamAssassin on several Linux boxes, but today was my
first non-Linux install. The system was a DEC Alpha running OSF1 v4.0.
I had to make a couple of minor tweaks to get a clean build, the patches
for which are below.
The change in type from unsigned char* to char* for full_read()
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Simon Lyall wrote:
Does the latest release of spamassassin support Razor v2 now?
**
The Center for Civic Networking PO Box 600618
Miles R. Fidelman, President & Newtonville, MA 0
On Sun, Jun 16, 2002 at 11:17:08AM +1200, Simon Lyall wrote:
| On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
| > Isn't that what "Undisclosed Recipients:" is meant for?
| Please note that Outlook mailers actaully violate the RFC's
Does this surprise anyone?I didn't think so.
| headers_
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 01:20:49PM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> | Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> |
> | DQ> Michael Moncur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | DQ>
> | DQ> > And a few slightly questionable scores:
> | DQ> >
> | DQ> > - This was 0.87 before.
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 04:39:25PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> I've sent in a patch to add support, but there were some bugs in the
> 2.03 version of Razor2 which caused problems with spamd (it works fine
> with spamassasin). This is the first time I've gotten online today and
> I notice ther
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 11:37:02PM +0100, Sean Rima wrote:
| One thing that I have noticed of late with korean spam is that the
| editor seems to be "Namo WebEditor v5.0". Whilst the software itself
| seems to be reputable, I hazard a guess that it is mot really mean't for
| email
I got a piece
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
One thing that I have noticed of late with korean spam is that the
editor seems to be "Namo WebEditor v5.0". Whilst the software itself
seems to be reputable, I hazard a guess that it is mot really mean't for
email
Sean
- --
Sean Rima
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Theo Van Dinter verbalised:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 08:24:19PM +0100, Sean Rima wrote:
>> I cannot remember howto disable RAZOR in SA. Someone pls hit me hard
>> with the answer :)
>
> score RAZOR_CHECK 0
That's the one :)
Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm, I just did a "cvs up" (on the head, not the branch) and:
>
> score: FORGED_RCVD_TRAIL 1.000 -> absent
> score: MSGID_CHARS_WEIRD -2.178 -> absent
> score: FROM_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL 1.000 -> absent
> score: X_NOT_PRESENT -1.920 -> absent
> score: FROM_A
Craig R Hughes writes:
> So it's just because the GA could get away with setting it to 0.921
> -- in practice it's a clear sign of nonspam, and we should just fix
> it at -2.0, which I've done on both branches now.
Okay. In HEAD, I made the rule less apt to be abused which is just as
well since
Daniel Quinlan wrote:
DQ> >>> score X_NOT_PRESENT -1.920
DQ> >>
DQ> >> This one is on my hitlist as well. Didn't work out very well.
DQ>
DQ> Craig R Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DQ>
DQ> > But it actually turns out to be great at clawing back false
DQ> > positives. I think
Daniel Quinlan wrote:
DQ> Craig R Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DQ>
DQ> >> score: BUGZILLA_BUG -2.000 -> 0.921
DQ>
DQ> > Moved to the right section of the scores file, and score reverted to -2.0
DQ>
DQ> But why is it positive? Doesn't it mean there are good messages in
DQ> the spam corpus o
Daniel Quinlan wrote:
>> I think this one should go. [FROM_AND_TO_SAME] is a common way to
>> send email to a large list of people without subjecting them all to
>> the address list.
"Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Isn't that what "Undisclosed Recipients:" is meant for?
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 01:54:13PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
| Craig R Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| > Changed back to 0.5 -- as mentioned in previous message, this is
| > triggering on the sourceforge-appended footers on mailing list
| > mails.
|
| Maybe it would be better to fin
>>> score X_NOT_PRESENT -1.920
>>
>> This one is on my hitlist as well. Didn't work out very well.
Craig R Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But it actually turns out to be great at clawing back false
> positives. I think we should leave it in with the low score.
Hrmm, it
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Bart Schaefer wrote:
>
> BS> These look suspicious:
>
> Changed back to ...
Hmm, I just did a "cvs up" (on the head, not the branch) and:
score: FORGED_RCVD_TRAIL 1.000 -> absent
score: MSGID_CHARS_WEIRD -2.178 -> absent
score: FROM_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL
Bart Schaefer wrote:
>> These look suspicious:
>>
>> score: ASCII_FORM_ENTRY 0.036 -> -1.660
Craig R Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Changed back to 0.5 -- as mentioned in previous message, this is
> triggering on the sourceforge-appended footers on mailing list
> mails.
Maybe it would b
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 08:24:19PM +0100, Sean Rima wrote:
> I cannot remember howto disable RAZOR in SA. Someone pls hit me hard
> with the answer :)
score RAZOR_CHECK 0
Or by removing the Razor perl modules of course. ;)
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"I wish Unix had the same reputation fo
Who gets the positive hits for this one? I certainly don't have any.
header BUGZILLA_BUG Subject =~ /\[Bug \d+\]/
describe BUGZILLA_BUG Looks like a Bugzilla bug
score BUGZILLA_BUG 0.921
Regardless of why that's happening, it may to be simple of a rule
anyway,
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 10:48:35AM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Razor2 support will be added to the CVS branch very soon, but will probably not
> be stable for a few days.
I've sent in a patch to add support, but there were some bugs in the
2.03 version of Razor2 which caused problems with spam
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 06:51:37PM -0400, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> No. Integration was judged to be too unstable for us to release razor
> v2 support. I believe razor1 modules are still included with razor2.
The razor1 modules are not included in the razor-agents for v2. However,
if you had v1 in
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 01:20:49PM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
| Daniel Quinlan wrote:
|
| DQ> Michael Moncur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| DQ>
| DQ> > And a few slightly questionable scores:
| DQ> >
| DQ> > - This was 0.87 before. Less and less useful?
| DQ> > score FROM_AND_TO_SAME
Daniel Quinlan wrote:
DQ> Michael Moncur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DQ>
DQ> > And a few slightly questionable scores:
DQ> >
DQ> > - This was 0.87 before. Less and less useful?
DQ> > score FROM_AND_TO_SAME -2.071
DQ>
DQ> I think this one should go. It's a common way to send email t
Bart Schaefer wrote:
BS> These look suspicious:
BS>
BS> score: ASCII_FORM_ENTRY 0.036 -> -1.660
Changed back to 0.5 -- as mentioned in previous message, this is triggering on
the sourceforge-appended footers on mailing list mails.
BS> score: BUGZILLA_BUG -2.000 -> 0.921
Moved to the right sect
It's a missing use line, not a missing file. Add the following line to
spamassassin.raw, among the other use lines at the top:
use Pod::Usage;
I've fixed this on the 2_3_0 CVS branch, so it'll be in 2.31 which might issue
sometime next week.
C
Skip Montanaro wrote:
SM>
SM> Craig> Sp
Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL happens a _lot_ with Outlook and Outlook Express. Any
> time an OE user receives a message with no real name, the address part
> gets added to their address book as the name. If they later send a reply
> or other message to that add
Rule added.
C
Skip Montanaro wrote:
SM> rawbody OBFUSCATING_JAVASCRIPT /charCodeAt|fromCharCode/
SM> describe OBFUSCATING_JAVASCRIPT JavaScript which tries to hide the message
___
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Appl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I cannot remember howto disable RAZOR in SA. Someone pls hit me hard
with the answer :)
Sean
- --
Sean Rimahttp://www.tcob1.net
Linux User: 231986 Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED HE
On 15 Jun 2002, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > score: FORGED_RCVD_TRAIL absent -> 1.000
> > score: FROM_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL absent -> 1.000
> > score: TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL absent -> 1.000
>
> You're looking at HEAD. These are new rules I added last night.
Ah
Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> score: ASCII_FORM_ENTRY 0.036 -> -1.660
> score: BUGZILLA_BUG -2.000 -> 0.921
BUGZILLA_BUG obviously needs to be fixed. Maybe an eval would be best.
> score: DATE_MISSING 0.248 -> -2.140
> score: EXCUSE_16 1.345 -> -0.721
> score: FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD
Michael Moncur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And a few slightly questionable scores:
>
> - This was 0.87 before. Less and less useful?
> score FROM_AND_TO_SAME -2.071
I think this one should go. It's a common way to send email to a
large list of people without subjecting them all
Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Two of the rule score changes since 2.21:
>
> score: NO_REAL_NAME 0.632 -> -1.068
> score: X_NOT_PRESENT 0.500 -> -1.920
X_NOT_PRESENT is not as good a rule as I had hoped and in my current
test corpus, it appears with about equal frequency in spam an
Just an observation:
Several of the translation files have descriptions for ALL_CAPS_SUBJECT,
but this has gone away -- we now have ALL_CAPS_HEADER and SUBJ_ALL_CAPS.
Most of the translations are missing ALL_CAPS_HEADER.
___
Don't mi
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Philipp Grau wrote:
> after upgrading to perl 5.6.1 on our IRIX 6.5.16 maschine, we ran into
> some trouble. SA (no matter what version 2.20, 2.21 or 2.30) does not
> run with procmail, on commandline no problem. The same program versions
> work on a linux system quite well.
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Michael Moncur wrote:
> When a new release comes out I like to be anal-retentive and go through
> the GA second-guessing its scores. This is my report for 2.30.
In a similar vein, here are the significant score changes since the last
CVS version before the GA was re-run. (I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Craig R. Hughes spake thusly:
> Sean Rima wrote:
>
> SR> Actually RAM has always been a problem for me because it is not
> SR> that cheapo here, it pees me off when people say that they can get
> SR> a strip for $20 when I would
Razor2 support will be added to the CVS branch very soon, but will probably not
be stable for a few days.
C
Matthew Cline wrote:
MC> On Saturday 15 June 2002 12:47 am, Jim Scott wrote:
MC> > Ok I have just installed on a new machine SpamAssassin 2.30 and Razor 2.x
MC> > and SpamAssassin is repo
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Ollie Acheson wrote:
> Shortly after I upgraded to 2.30, I got the following spam which, as
> you can see, received a negative score. I don't understand why, since
> neither the from nor the to are in my whitelist.
>
> Is this a bug?
It's not strictly a bug, it's just the w
Hi -
Shortly after I upgraded to 2.30, I got the following spam which, as
you can see, received a negative score. I don't understand why, since
neither the from nor the to are in my whitelist.
Is this a bug?
Ollie
- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PR
Craig> SpamAssassin 2.30 (Viking dentist @ l'orange) Released!
Installed okay for me, however I get an error when I execute spamassassin
--help:
% spamassassin --help
SpamAssassin version 2.30
Undefined subroutine &main::pod2usage called at /usr/bin/spamassassin line 59.
I
Hello,
after upgrading to perl 5.6.1 on our IRIX 6.5.16 maschine, we ran into some
trouble. SA (no matter what version 2.20, 2.21 or 2.30) does not run with
procmail, on commandline no problem. The same program versions work on a
linux system quite well. This is the error message in the procmail
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 02:59:08PM +0200, Tony L. Svanstrom wrote:
| On Sat, 15 Jun 2002 the voices made Michael Moncur write:
|
| > When a new release comes out I like to be anal-retentive and go through the
| > GA second-guessing its scores. This is my report for 2.30.
|
| > - This works well
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 09:24:40PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| > use Mail::Header;
| >
| > foreach my $message (@files) {
| > open(FILE, "<$dir/$message") or next;
(it's good to qoute the text you're asking about)
my $header = new Mail::H
Bill> We may need expanded rules to handle obfuscation. The following
Bill> javascript decodes into another obfuscation javasscript. I didn't
Bill> have time to persue it further (what the sender is counting on i
Bill> suppose)...
Well, I wasted a couple minutes this morning tr
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002 the voices made Michael Moncur write:
> When a new release comes out I like to be anal-retentive and go through the
> GA second-guessing its scores. This is my report for 2.30.
> - This works well for me but users in some countries may want to change it
> score SUBJ_FULL_OF_8
My ISP recently installed SA 2.20, and I'm starting to poke around
with it. I'd like to configure SA to /not/ report /any/ incoming spam to the
various blacklists it can report to. The reason I want to do this is that
I'm using another spam filter currently, and would like to add spamassas
When a new release comes out I like to be anal-retentive and go through the
GA second-guessing its scores. This is my report for 2.30.
Overall, the GA did a NICE job this time. I have very little to complain
about and haven't found a single score I'll be bothering to override. Here
are a few scor
On Saturday 15 June 2002 12:47 am, Jim Scott wrote:
> Ok I have just installed on a new machine SpamAssassin 2.30 and Razor 2.x
> and SpamAssassin is reporting that razor is not found. Does the version of
> SpamAssassin support Razor 2.x?
No, because Razor 2.x uses the Razor2 Perl package, while
Ok I have just installed on a new machine SpamAssassin 2.30 and Razor 2.x
and SpamAssassin is reporting that razor is not found. Does the version of
SpamAssassin support Razor 2.x? Or am I required to install an older version
of Razor? I thought I heard someone early say that Razor 2.x also instal
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 12:23:35AM -0700, Jim Scott wrote:
> Just upgraded my test box and while running in debug mode I am seeing these
> messages. Does this indicate that it is not looking up these lists? I looked
> in 50_scores.cf and they are not set to 0. Is there some setting now that
> you
Just upgraded my test box and while running in debug mode I am seeing these
messages. Does this indicate that it is not looking up these lists? I looked
in 50_scores.cf and they are not set to 0. Is there some setting now that
you need to use to turn this on? What does it mena by "but did not get
72 matches
Mail list logo
