To: John Schneider; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FW: Re[2]: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails
?
Hello John,
JS> Abigail,
JS> If a user puts this recipe into their .procmail file,
JS> where would the log entries be collected. (Sorry, but
JS> I'm a procma
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, BG Mahesh wrote:
> Not sure if the rules we have added in local.cf are wrong. We are using SA+procmail
>
> header LATEST_NET_SPAM Subject =~/^Latest Net Critical Upgrade/i
> describe LATEST_NET_SPAM Bounce - "Spam from Microsoft"
> scoreLATEST_NET_SPAM 10.0
>
> Even if t
Original Message-
JS> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JS> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Abigail
JS> Marshall
JS> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 5:10 PM
JS> To: Stephen Reese; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JS> Subject: Re[2]: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
JS&g
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 05:27:57PM -0400, Stephen Reese elucidated:
> how do I turn up the MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE?
>
check out your .spamassassin/user_prefs file, it has directions in
there. But it is basically like:
score MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE 6.0
or some such.
Dale
-
how do I turn up the MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Scott Comboni
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 9:07 AM
To: Dale Harris
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails
> -Original Message-
> From: BG Mahesh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 1:37 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
>
>
> > Well they were being passed straight to the
> Well they were being passed straight to the user since the courier
> mailfilter file was picking them out due to the size being > than 24kb
> so there was no chance for SA to parse them.
>
hi
Not sure if the rules we have added in local.cf are wrong. We are using SA+procmail
header LATEST_N
This has seemed to work for me as well. Like you pointed out the ones
that have no .exe still manage to get in.
Scott
On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 20:46, Dale Harris wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:37:27AM +1200, Simon Byrnand elucidated:
> >
> > Although I havn't tried it, I would say that teac
ent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
Simon Byrnand wrote:
>>I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I
>>am also getting messages that seem to orginate from o
Reese
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails
?
This could also be 2.55 issue where messages with multiple MIME parts
was not completly scanned? For example, the thread about pic.gif where
that spammer used some trick with multiple mime parts and that caused
the messa
This could also be 2.55 issue where messages with multiple MIME parts was
not completly scanned?
For example, the thread about pic.gif where that spammer used some trick
with multiple mime parts
and that caused the message to be invisible. The good news is this is fixed
in 2.60 and that's a final
Hello Stephen,
Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 3:09:51 PM, you wrote:
SR> h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
SR> though see's everything else?
Because the 150K attachment that comes with Swen is either
too big to be sent to SA (depending on how you have
configured
Simon Byrnand wrote:
I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
don't.
The reason SpamAssassin doesn't catch them is twofold:
Maybe I'm misinterpreting the original question, but was it no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Simon,
Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 4:37:27 PM, you wrote:
SB> Although I havn't tried it, I would say that teaching the message to
BAYES
SB> using sa-learn in 2.60 should be very effective, as BAYES_99 in 2.60
has a
SB> high enough score to ta
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 02:40:49AM +0100, Daniel Bird wrote:
> Maybe I'm misinterpreting the original question, but was it not the fact
> that it appeared SA was not even scanning the mail?
could be, I was just reading the subject which implies "why does SA not
mark these mails as spam?"
--
Ran
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:37:27AM +1200, Simon Byrnand elucidated:
>
> Although I havn't tried it, I would say that teaching the message to BAYES
> using sa-learn in 2.60 should be very effective, as BAYES_99 in 2.60 has a
> high enough score to tag as spam without any other tests...
>
That an
half Of Ryan
Moore
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 7:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
Is there a size limit that SA implements to avoid scanning huge messages
whose content is primarily binary? I know amavisd has a limit such as
th
Stephen Reese wrote:
> h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
> though see's everything else?
In a nutshell, because virus messages don't look much like spam.
Virus messages are usually sent via a legitimate ISP's mail server.
They have (usually) valid return addresse
> I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
> also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
> don't.
The reason SpamAssassin doesn't catch them is twofold:
1) It's a virus, not spam.
2) It's only just come out, after the ruleset for 2.60 wa
ED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
I am getting nailed with these as well, 72 for the day so far. Other
admins I talked here have had over 100 so far on the day.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Stephen Reese
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 06:09:51PM -0400, Stephen Reese wrote:
> h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
> though see's everything else?
Worms are not spam by definition. (the "people" sending the worms when
you get it don't intend to send it to you, therefore it's not
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
don't.
I am running sa 2.6, redhat 7.3, courier 0
: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
don't.
I am running sa 2.6, redhat 7.3, courier 0.43.0
The following is a header
I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
don't.
I am running sa 2.6, redhat 7.3, courier 0.43.0
The following is a header from one of the messages:
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Return-Path
24 matches
Mail list logo
