Re: [SAtalk] Bayes NFS safe?

2004-01-16 Thread Andreas Stollar
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Billy Huddleston wrote: > Are you all load balancing these? If so, are you doing it at the SMTP level > or using SPAMD ? I'm getting ready to implement a 2 node system with > qmail..and wondering if using a single SMTP machine calling spamc against a > cluster of SA machines

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes NFS safe?

2004-01-15 Thread Andreas Stollar
I asked this a few weeks ago, with no response. What I have been able to gather is that a system wide db will work ok using a cluster of many mail servers, as long the bayes db is only being read. I have seen the bayes db create stuck lock files on just one box with 100 spamd processes running (sp

Re: [SAtalk] FP with backhair

2004-01-14 Thread Andreas Stollar
Seems like any attachment, especially a binary such as a pdf would go over the maximum size to be scanned by SA. This must have been one tiny pdf, or you have set your SA instance to scan messages over the max size (default 250k) Most pdf's are much larger than this. Andreas On Wed, 14 Jan 2004,

RE: [SAtalk] New Ruleset Available!!! TRIPWIRE! You don't want t o

2004-01-14 Thread Andreas Stollar
Worldwide codes are here: http://flyaow.com/citycodea.htm Andreas On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, SRH-Lists wrote: > Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:43:45 -0600 > From: SRH-Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: 'Fred' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Ne

[SAtalk] global bayes in large cluster

2004-01-06 Thread Andreas Stollar
Hi, I am running spamd/spamc 2.61 on a relatively small server (300 email addresses) but which is nonetheless, rather busy. I have been using a global bayes db so everyone can take advantage of the learned spam and ham that I feed it. This seems to be working well although occasionally, I notice b

Re[2]: [SAtalk] reporting the spam 'hosts"

2003-10-15 Thread Andreas Stollar
ut down their customers (at risk of losing them) since no small/medium ISP will start blocking any major provider any time soon, because this would inevitably mean that grandma at AOL would not be able to send our customers mail, resulting in more los

RE: [SAtalk] possible to forward messages marked as spam to seper ate account?

2003-10-02 Thread Andreas Stollar
> > I'd like to have all mail marked as possible spam copied to a > > separate > > address (like [EMAIL PROTECTED])one possible way is to pass all > > mail through a regex and redirect accordingly, but I'm > > finding qmail's > > facilities for that a bit cumbersome, and probably a waste

RE: [SAtalk] Razor-users-2.36 make install error: Can't locate loadable object for module Digest::SHA1

2003-09-29 Thread Andreas Stollar
; From: John Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: 'Andreas Stollar' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Razor-users-2.36 make install error: Can't locate > loadable object for modu

RE: [SAtalk] Razor-users-2.36 make install error: Can't locate loadable object for module Digest::SHA1

2003-09-29 Thread Andreas Stollar
ED]> > To: 'Andreas Stollar' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Razor-users-2.36 make install error: Can't locate > loadable object for module Digest::SHA1 > > Yes. That happe

Re: [SAtalk] Razor-users-2.36 make install error: Can't locate loadable object for module Digest::SHA1

2003-09-29 Thread Andreas Stollar
Did you do a 'make install' ? Seems like its not finding the right perl modules, this usually happens to me after a perl upgrade. Andreas On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, John Schneider wrote: > Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:34:50 -0700 > From: John Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" >

Re: [SAtalk] Alt spam scanning products

2003-09-24 Thread Andreas Stollar
I tried to use it. It was expensive, as they were going to charge us per email box. Also it required that some qmail patches be applied to the qmail source tree in order for it to work. I use qmail-ldap, and the patch would not apply after applying the LDAP patch, and the LDAP patch would not a

Re: [SAtalk] Ignore SPAM rule for local users

2003-09-19 Thread Andreas Stollar
If you are using qmail-scanner, you just have to tell it not to scan mail for 127.0.0.1. This is set in environment variables, tcp.smtp. You can set localhost, or a group, or subnet of ips to not get scanned. 127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" :allow,QMAILQUEUE=/usr/sbin/qmail-scanner-queue.pl" And

Re: [SAtalk] no spam today uses SA?

2003-09-15 Thread Andreas Stollar
So what is the problem? They packaged it up with some Windows tools and made it into a 'SpamAssassin for Dummies' product. I am sure no one on *this* list needs that, but for those that do, there is an option. Free version also available. Nothing illegal about charging for support/add-ons/enhan

Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-05 Thread Andreas Stollar
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Phil N wrote: > I was wondering if I could get some feedback from people that are doing > more than just identifying spam in the subject for their users to handle > themselves. > > Specifically: > > - are you deleting any messages marked as spam? > - how are you determining

Re: [SAtalk] virtual user config for large site

2003-09-04 Thread Andreas Stollar
another if you want, /home/speakeasy/u/s/user, etc. Andreas On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Andreas Stollar wrote: > Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 10:49:26 -0700 (PDT) > From: Andreas Stollar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [SAtal

[SAtalk] virtual user config for large site

2003-09-04 Thread Andreas Stollar
Hello, I have spamassassin set up and working with maildrop and qmail. The global maildroprc file calls spamd like this: xfilter "/usr/bin/spamc -u $LOGNAME" and spamd prefs are set up like this: OPTIONS="-d -m 100 -c -u speakeasy -x --virtual-config-dir=/home/speakeasy/spamrules/%u/" This a