On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 10:25:08PM -0600, Scott A Crosby wrote:
> I got the following message in my inbox. Its not spam per-se, but
> something I probably do want to filter.
It's one of the stupid blackmusic.ch things. I just blocked them and
the hosting.ch or whatever it's called and called it g
I got the following message in my inbox. Its not spam per-se, but
something I probably do want to filter.
***
From: Yahoo!Member Services <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Newsletter] Registration confirmation - Yahoo! Mail
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 15:13:13 -0800 (PST)
Reply-To: [EM
I'll answer my own question :)
Create a razor-agent.conf file in each user's .razor directory that
contains the line:
logfile= /dev/null
That seems to be the best way to get rid of razor logs.
Rob M.
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Rob Mangiafico wrote:
> Hello:
>
> If we are using razo
What about mail servers that don't? Or situations where SA
is run on a standalone in a gateway configuration and
relaying to the actual server? SpamD/SpamC is perfect for
that as it is. So would MySQL type of configuration, no?
As it is my setup has all email scanned at the gateway and
then passed
Well, it's a wide variety of IP's, but it is client-only type traffic. The
razor servers do not need to initiate connections to port 2703 on your
machine, so is there any significant risk in allowing your machine to
initiate client connections to any outside machine on port 2703 (provided
there
I have the same question about whether Razor is working for our
installation. When I run the spamassassin -tD < sample-spam.txt it does say
Razor is detecting the message. However, when I run the message through a
telnet to port 25 the SA report comes back without Razor2 in it.
We are running R
Sorry gagel, I'm having trouble following you. How are you doing your
config? Are all your users local, aliased, virtual, database stored, or
combo?
> -Original Message-
> From: gagel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 3:18 PM
> To: Chris Petersen; Chris Santerre
At the command line run:
spamassassin -tD < sample-spam.txt
At the top will be extensive debug output including any problems reading
the rules file, any lack of DNS support, etc, as well as debug status while
running razor.
At 11:34 AM 11/1/2002 -0800, Henry Kwan wrote:
Hi.
Have been using SA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Henry Kwan wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Have been using SA for a little while and with the 2.43 update, finally
> decided to install razor as well. But when I do 'make test', it reports
> back that both razor tests have been skipped with no r
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 01:30:30PM -0500, Frank Pineau wrote:
> Same download link as on the website, just change the version number.
I also have an archive at http://www.kluge.net/ftp/pub/spamassassin/old_versions
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Now they show you how detergents take out bloodst
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 11:34:06AM -0800, Henry Kwan wrote:
> run the razor-client, it appears to be working so how can I tell if SA is
> utilizing razor for checks?
Run spamassassin or spamd with -D. If you haven't turned it off, you
could also check your razor log file. :)
--
Randomly Genera
Hi.
Have been using SA for a little while and with the 2.43 update, finally
decided to install razor as well. But when I do 'make test', it reports
back that both razor tests have been skipped with no reason given. When I
run the razor-client, it appears to be working so how can I tell if SA
Don't squeeze the Charmin.
At 10:25 AM 11/01/2002, you wrote:
II
--
... don't touch the bang bang fruit
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
http://ads.sourceforge.net
Here is the result of running spamd under debug (-D) mode.
I ran a spamc -c < sample-spam.txt, and the spamd process spun up the
CPU to 100%.
I then ctrl-c'd the spamc command, and this caused spamd to seg fault.
debug: ignore: test message to precompile patterns and load modules
debug: using "/
Yikes... sorry for the double post... Forgot to attach the file.. :(
-Paul
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en
> Problem: Use SA on Aliases and / or virtusers AND real users combined.
yup, that one exactly.
> So far the only solution looks like using MySQL. (Which for reasons of my
> own I don't want to do right now.)
>From what I've seen, a simple solution would be to get spamc to pass a
couple more bi
I have found spamd and spamc to be quite effective and fairly low load with a
high volume.
I scan over 2 million messages a month on each of 4 mail servers with almost 30
being marked as spam. The machines I have are Dual xeon 1.8GHZ boxes with a GIG
of RAM each.
Mark
Quoting gagel <[EMAIL PROT
Greetings,
I have been using SpamAssassin for quite some time. Today, I attempted
to upgrade from v2.42 to v2.43.
I am using qmail + qmail-scanner (with sophos) + spamassassin. Perl
v5.6.1
I am using a RedHat 7.3 system.
Everything had been running properly until I tried to upgrade to 2.43.
Now
Greetings,
I have been using SpamAssassin for quite some time. Today, I attempted
to upgrade from v2.42 to v2.43.
I am using qmail + qmail-scanner (with sophos) + spamassassin. Perl
v5.6.1
I am using a RedHat 7.3 system.
Everything had been running properly until I tried to upgrade to 2.43.
Now
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 10:18:06 -0800, you wrote:
>Where can I find an older version of SpamAssassin? I'm looking for a
>2.3x version. My false negative rate on 2.43 is through the roof.
Same download link as on the website, just change the version number.
It looks like you're looking for SUBJ_FULL_OF_8BITS. See if these messages
are triggering that rule. I /dev/null anything that hits on that one.
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Harry
| Putnam
| Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 6:12 A
Where can I find an older version of SpamAssassin? I'm looking for a
2.3x version. My false negative rate on 2.43 is through the roof.
Steve Evans
SDSU Foundation
(619) 594-0653
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
Tungste
II
--
... don't touch the bang bang fruit
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en
_
We had performance problems using spamassassin on our mail
machine. Mostly because it was a windows box calling a perl
script which called spamassassin.
I setup a linux box and use spamd/spamc on it. I've gone
from well over a minute to process a single email to an
average of about 1/10th of a sec
I've been looking into this problem for a while now. I've searched the
archives and found many questions but little answers.
Problem: Use SA on Aliases and / or virtusers AND real users combined.
So far the only solution looks like using MySQL. (Which for reasons of my
own I don't want to do righ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Jeff Burstein wrote:
> You seem to be running into two main problems:
>
> 1) Your mail traffic is extremely bursty (it all comes at once!).
>
> 2) Your MTA doesn't seem to do anything to limit resource consumption. (I'm
> not fam
Classification: PUBLIC
I should note that I snipped off all the variable assignment for clarity...
|-Original Message-
|From: Smart, Dan
|Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 8:55 AM
|To: 'Thomas Nyman'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: RE: [SAtalk] spamd/spamc and J.Hardin Email-Sanitizer
|
|
|Cl
Great thanks to all those who have helped with our problem.
I should have done some more checking before I posted to the list. We
were initially not using spamd/spoamc when I posted. After changing it
to spamd/spamc it is able to process much more mail without as much CPU
overhead, but we are
Classification: PUBLIC
Here's my Procmail that runs like a champ.
= procmailrc ==
# Run Sanitizer
INCLUDERC=${BINDIR}/local-rules.procmail
INCLUDERC=${BINDIR}/html-trap.procmail
# Run SpamAssassin Daemon Client
# Calling SpamAssassin D
Setup: RedHat 7.3
Spamassassin 2.50
(Running as daemon)
In the many rules that spamassasin parses for each message, are some
of them devoted to identifying a subject line that has too many
non-alphanumic characters? Some kind of percentage deal...
Can someone identify any such rule
On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 02:39:10PM -0600, Jeff Engelhardt wrote:
> We are looking into spamassassin, but after minimal testing it looks
> like we will grind our machine to halt if we have many people using it.
> Our mail server is a Sun Ultra60 with 2x450MHz CPUs and 1.2GB RAM.
> That machine is
Daniel Quinlan said:
> A few of their rules were quite good though and I got more than one idea
> during the process. I'm not quite ready to attempt it again, though.
Yep, it was clearly a herculean task, I can understand being averse
to doing it again soon ;) Great results, though!
--j.
-
Kelsey Cummings said:
> > Do you know if "spamd -Q" is 2.44/2.50?
>
> It doesn't look like my patches have made it into a release yet -- I just
> patched 2.43 this morning and attached the diffs. (Of course, I didn't
> patch spamd.raw let me fix that.)
It's in HEAD (2.50), which will be the basi
Hi
I've just implemented spamd/spamc however it seems that when I do my
email-sanitizer rules are ignored...does anyone know why this might be?
Thomas
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
Tungsten T handheld. Power & Colo
SpamTalk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Might worthwhile to peruse his regex and see if there is anything
> there to incorporate in SA rules.
I did recently test and slowly integrate a huge number of Postfix
regular expressions that I found in various places. I tested over 2000
expressions (in va
Jeremy Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Descriptions like 'Contains "My wife, Jody" testimonial' have the words
> "My Wife, Jody" and will trip that filter. I don't think that spam
> descriptions should be identified as spam traits. I wonder if there's a
> way to describe the spam trait with
Jeff Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We are looking into spamassassin, but after minimal testing it looks
> like we will grind our machine to halt if we have many people using it.
> Our mail server is a Sun Ultra60 with 2x450MHz CPUs and 1.2GB RAM.
> That machine is server incoming mai
37 matches
Mail list logo
