On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 08:10:15AM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
The only way to not have SA check a message is to not call SA under
certain conditions.
What, using procmail to send the trusted mail straight to the mailbox,
bypassing SA? (Procmail - another program I'll have to get to grips
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 11:06:41AM +0100, Jim Ford wrote:
However, I still see SA checking info in the headers of the whitelisted mails.
Is this normal, please?
Yes. A white/black-list does not stop SA from running over a message.
They simply add a certain value (positive or negative) to the
Oh yeah. Almost forgot.
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q251/1/25.ASP
-Original Message-
From: Tom Meunier
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 7:42 AM
To: 'Stewart, John'; 'Ron Poserina Jr.';
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.slipstick.com/rules/backup.htm
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 01:34:53PM +0100, Jim Ford wrote:
What, using procmail to send the trusted mail straight to the mailbox,
bypassing SA? (Procmail - another program I'll have to get to grips with!)
If you're using procmail, yes. Basically you need to put the logic of
do I want to filter
Jack Gostl wrote:
My /home/$user/.procmail/rules.rc file is:
:0fw
| /usr/bin/spamc
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
SPAM
---
That now works only if I change line2 to /usr/bin/spamassassin.
This isn't a terribly big system here, so I suppose I could get away
with that, but I'd much prefer to
I'm going to repost a message from Gary Funck that solves this
nicely. I've been running it for awhile and it works like a charm.
--
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu May 29 08:08:49 2003
Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 20:56:10 -0700
From: Gary Funck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: SpamAssassin listserve
I am testing spamassassin at home for possible use at work, where there
are 1000+ users as opposed to one. I keep seeing two errors in particular
popping up and Im not even sure if they are worth worrying about as, I
beleive Ive come up with a solution for one... anyway.
Im running spamassassin on
Jack Gostl wrote:
On Sat, 31 May 2003, Steve Wilson wrote:
My /home/$user/.procmail/rules.rc file is:
:0fw
| /usr/bin/spamc
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
SPAM
---
That now works only if I change line2 to /usr/bin/spamassassin.
This isn't a terribly big system here, so I suppose I could get
Jim Ford wrote on Thu, 29 May 2003 23:49:05 +0100:
Theo Van Dinter's Handlespam
can you give a URL? I must have overlooked it getting mentioned anywhere.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
IE-Center: http://ie5.de
Has anyone setup local mail aliases for ham and spam?
What I want is when someone receives a mail that is spam but not marked
by SA, they redirect the message to a this-is-spam email alias,
which then runs it through sa-learn -spam
similarly, there would be a this-is-ham address for sa-learn
Hi,
I found a couple of messages that had a score of 5.8 - 5 being my default SPAM
level. They were delivered to the end-user, however they should have been quarantined.
Using SA 2.52 and MailScanner 4.12-2
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Damian
---
On Thursday, May 8, 2003, at 10:58 Canada/Mountain, Bill Horsman wrote:
On Thu, 2003-05-08 at 17:22, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 05:12:34PM +0100, Bill Horsman wrote:
But my question is: how do I get SA to forward just ham mail to my
bill-cp mailbox?
Add a rule to your
Sorry, I know absolutely nothing about cyrus.
Greg
could you describe an alternative scenario using cyrus
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Greg Webster wrote:
Hello, SpamAssassin mailing list :)
Some new documentation I've created. I'll be placing this online, but
figured I'd post it here as well.
Thanks for all the good info guys, will investigate the feasability on
my end.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 8:45 AM
To: Stewart, John; Ron Poserina Jr.;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] OT: Exchange / Outlook Rule
is there a rule grabbing it and saying that its OK to deliver before any
other rules get processed? for example I had [EMAIL PROTECTED] in my user_prefs as
a whitelist item and I was sending test messages full of high scoring spam
goodness and they were being delivered to the mailbox sent to
God afternoon, (LuKreme?),
On Sat, 31 May 2003, LuKreme wrote:
Has anyone setup local mail aliases for ham and spam?
What I want is when someone receives a mail that is spam but not marked
by SA, they redirect the message to a this-is-spam email alias,
which then runs it through sa-learn
At 12:37 PM 5/31/2003 -0400, William Stearns wrote:
God afternoon, (LuKreme?),
On Sat, 31 May 2003, LuKreme wrote:
Has anyone setup local mail aliases for ham and spam?
What I want is when someone receives a mail that is spam but not marked
by SA, they redirect the message to a this-is-spam
Also, you don't need the spamassassin.lock file
[this avoids the lock fiile]
;0fw
| /usr/bin/spamassassin
Yeah, the lock file is recommended in the SA docs. as I recall, to keep from
creating too many processes (ie, to serialize spamassassin calls on a per-user
basis). Since procmail
On Sat, 31 May 2003 09:09:25 -0700 (PDT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Robin wrote:
could you describe an alternative scenario using cyrus
Sorry, I know absolutely nothing about cyrus.
That seems par for the course - between Cyrus and LDAP, it seems nobody
can/will explain how to set up either
I've mentioned from time to time that I'd post my procmailrc to this
list.
Here's how it works... all my mail goes through spamassassin. If it is
a false positive, or false negative, I bounce it to daf-ham or
daf-spam (respectively)
My account name on my box is daf. You will want to change this!
I just upgraded to 2.55 and now the *SPAM* is not longer showing
on the subject line. I see a small note, and somewhat have searched
through 4000+ messages.
Here's the idiot question. did I miss something... I moved from 2.50
to 2.55
--
Kirk Moore
Network/Software Engineer
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 10:01, Kirk Moore wrote:
I just upgraded to 2.55 and now the *SPAM* is not longer showing
on the subject line. I see a small note, and somewhat have searched
through 4000+ messages.
Here's the idiot question. did I miss something... I moved from 2.50
to
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 05:31:32PM +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
can you give a URL? I must have overlooked it getting mentioned anywhere.
I usually mention it on the list occasionally.
http://www.kluge.net/~felicity/random/handlespam.txt
Basically it'll take an mbox file and run each message
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 11:49:05PM +0100, Jim Ford wrote:
reports (to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) are getting bounced with the error 'Domain of
sender address does not exist', with my own local 'domain' and login name
quoted. I suspect this is a sendmail issue and as I don't have a clue how to
fix it,
Would it be wise (actually, would it do any harm) to have one BAYES
database for a whole site, instead of per-user basis? (Just a hand full
of users.)
There are some advantages and some drawbacks here. On the advantage side as
it learns from the spam of one user it can apply those lessons
This is probably NOT a good idea (in general).
Not everyone at your site will classify the same message in the same way.
One or some of them may want to receive mortgage, hgh, viagra, or other
home shopping spam in their inbox. If you know all your users to make
this decision for them
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 02:57:16PM -0700, Greg Webster wrote:
3. As root, create a file at /usr/bin/postfixfilter with the following
content: #!/bin/bash
/usr/bin/spamc | /usr/sbin/sendmail -i $@
exit $?
[...]
7. In /etc/postfix/master.cf in the Services section, alter the 'smtp'
- Original Message -
From: John Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 1:01 AM
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Getting spamd to start on boot.
When I run chkconfig --list, spamd does not show up.
When I run chkconfig --list spamd, I get the following:
service
- Original Message -
From: Vivek Khera [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:08 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Advice Please
AL == Alan Leghart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AL to use different encoding (although, IIRC, it's not base-64 by
AL default). I
Good evening, Guenther,
On 30 May 2003, guenther wrote:
How can I do that? Did not find any note, how to define a site wide
BAYES database. TIA
http://www.stearns.org/doc/spamassassin-setup.current.html#autoreporting
Cheers,
- Bill
I have a somewhat simple question, i hope someone can answer for me. I am
currently using spamassassin-2.53 on a mail server and all it does is handle
all incoming smtp traffic for a mail server sitting behind it, run its scans,
and then passes it back to the other mail server.
Everything is
Jack Gostl wrote:
On Sat, 31 May 2003, Steve Wilson wrote:
My /home/$user/.procmail/rules.rc file is:
:0fw
| /usr/bin/spamc
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
SPAM
---
That now works only if I change line2 to /usr/bin/spamassassin.
This isn't a terribly big system here, so I suppose I could get
I don't see what the problem is here.
I compiled spamassassin via rpm -tb spamassassin-tar-ball to give me
rpm's to install, and spamassassin is controlled via chkconfig spamassassin
on and service spamassassin start/stop/restart works fine.
If you are running a rhat box, you really should
Hi Keoki -
You should probably talk to your system administrator or your ISP,
whomever
handles your e-mail service. The mailing list you sent your message to is
for people who use and develop SpamAssassin. There is little chance that
anyone on this list has anything to do with your e-mail
Hello,
I'm using SA 2.55 on a Red Hat 7.3 Box running Qmail. I just came a cross
something interesting.
I place the following line in my .qmail files:
| Ifspamh e-mail-spam.
So, the e-mail gets filtered through SA, and if it is spam it gets sent to x
address.
Please look at the bottom of this
To be honest, I imagine the OP just doesn't get it, and quite possibly never
will. I really just wanted to reply with something other than insults.
I too have seen several of these messages posted to this list. I have been
pretty appalled at how nasty many of the replies are. I have noticed
Or, if people exclude this list when replying to anyone who for whatever reason send a
complaint about spamassassin disrupting service or whatever...
I don't see any reason for anyone to include the list in a reply?...
/ Per
-Original Message-
From: Simon Byrnand [mailto:[EMAIL
Patrick Morris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) had this to say on 05/29/03 at 23:23:
This may be a silly question -- but why not just have Sendmail do the
LDAP account lookup itself (using the LDAP_ROUTING feature)? Seems like
it'd be quite a bit less overhead to deal with than passing stuff to a
I have auto_learn 1 in my local.cf but I dont appear to be learning any new
spam in bayes. Checking the contents shows I am not quite up with my ham
side yet but over o the spam. But the number of messages learned is from
using sa-learn.
spamassassin -D --lint shows the following strangeness
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 01:44:49AM +0100, urbanbuda wrote:
The lines I am concerned about are the bayes tie-ing to DB file R/O, all
other logs I have seen posted here always show this as R/W as does the
auto-whitelist entry when it appears in my spamd output. What am I missing?
In check mode,
As far as I know this is an open list that allows non-subscribers to post
to it. BIG MISTAKE for a list of this nature IMHO. If the list were made
subscriber posting only then a number of things would happen:
If you think this is a hassle, have some sympathy for the list manager who
has to
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Simon Byrnand wrote:
Jack Gostl wrote:
On Sat, 31 May 2003, Steve Wilson wrote:
My /home/$user/.procmail/rules.rc file is:
:0fw
| /usr/bin/spamc
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
SPAM
---
That now works only if I change line2 to /usr/bin/spamassassin.
This
[Please do NOT cc me, I am a subscriber to the list]
I have spent a few days G configuring my system to use SA and
Razor. Once I found Bill Stearns excellent reference document, it was a
(relative) breeze.
My problem (such as it is) is using the system wide spam and ham traps.
My emailer is
I'm looking at implementing a milter in sendmail that passes the email
through spamassassin but allows us to reject at mta level if the sa rating
is over a certain level (e.g. 30+ or something like that).
Now, my question is simple - has anyone else got a milter running that does
that? I would
My problem (such as it is) is using the system wide spam and ham traps.
My emailer is Evolution, and to bounce the message, I need at minimum
Alt a, o, d , address, send
What I would like to do is automate this, perhaps with the use of a
filter. Procmail springs to mind, but I have not
MIMEdefang'll do everything you mentioned, and it's a (relative) snap to
set up.
Cassandra Lynette Brockett wrote:
I'm looking at implementing a milter in sendmail that passes the email
through spamassassin but allows us to reject at mta level if the sa rating
is over a certain level (e.g. 30+
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 06:54:37PM -0500, Stewart, John wrote:
So this explains what happens if the DB gets too *small*. But what governs
how *big* the database can get? Would it just be big enough to contain the
last 500,000 seen tokens? Would this be a problem for performance/DB size?
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 22:30, William Stearns wrote:
Good evening, Guenther,
Good morning, William,
How can I do that? Did not find any note, how to define a site wide
BAYES database. TIA
http://www.stearns.org/doc/spamassassin-setup.current.html#autoreporting
Now that page looks
I've searched through archives and documentation,
and I can't find any mention of this issue, so I hope nobody minds my asking
here. I'm running Exim 3.36 and SpamAssassin 2.55 on a RedHat 8.0 machine.
I've used 'dman's configuration for Exim 3.x (his
page is widely referenced, but I
So I installed 2.5.5 in my user environment, and it was working fine.
Interestingly, the SA report did *not* have SPAM: prepended to every
line. I didn't customize the report template at all.
Shortly thereafter, my web/mailhost installed 2.5.4, including
spamd. I decided to start using it,
Argh. Nevermind. I found the local CHANGE file for our systemwide install
of SA, and it turns out our sysadmin made a customization:
lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm
- after 229 (among the other s/// transformations)
# MPR 5/12/03
# add prefix to report
s/^/SPAM: /gm;
On Saturday, May 31, 2003, 9:05:35 PM Theo wrote:
TVD That's going to be the envelope sender. handlespam just calls sendmail,
TVD and unless told otherwise (via -f [EMAIL PROTECTED]), it'll figure out
TVD the from using your username and domain.
Or just change the line:
my $fromAddr =
52 matches
Mail list logo
