Brian Taber wrote:
Hmmm... Another potential SPF issue... I have a customer with AMEX,
received an email from them, and the SPF checks conflict with each other:
helo=
Received: from mta301.email.americanexpress.com
(mta301.email.americanexpress.com [206.132.204.250])
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmmm... Another potential SPF issue... I have a customer with AMEX,
received an email from them, and the SPF checks conflict with each other:
helo=
Received: from mta301.email.americanexpress.com
(mta301.email.americanexpress.com [206.132.204.250])
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And the scores:
3.1
Not if your "vilter" strips off the markup and applies its own.
At this point I'd ask the "vilter" experts.
{o.o}
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Keller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
After rebuilding my sendmail.cf with the following:
INPUT_MAIL_FILTER(`smtp-vilter',
`S=unix:/var/smtp-vilter/sm
From: "Steven Dickenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Jul 5, 2005, at 8:37 AM, Jerry Van Brimmer wrote:
> >> I also set my bayes to score 5 points for a 99 score, that gets
> >> the stock
> >> scam guys who think they are just too slick by using a
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 10:23:45PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 08:41 PM 7/5/2005, The Doctor wrote:
> >Spam Assassin 3.0.4 works with milter-spamc 0.25, smf-spamd and MailScanner
> >Current.
> >
> >Spam Assassin 3.1.0 only works MailScanner Current less than 10% .
> >
> >How can I help to deter
At 08:41 PM 7/5/2005, The Doctor wrote:
Spam Assassin 3.0.4 works with milter-spamc 0.25, smf-spamd and MailScanner
Current.
Spam Assassin 3.1.0 only works MailScanner Current less than 10% .
How can I help to determine where the source of the problem is?
There is no such thing as 3.1.0 yet.
At 08:49 PM 7/5/2005, Bjoern Olausson wrote:
Qmail-scanner-queu semms not to submitt the -u flag to spamd. So if I
run spamd with the "-v -u vpopmail" option I get the following error:
check your settings for the vpopmail user and make sure it has a home
directory, and that it can write to it.
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 04:00:19AM +0200, mouss wrote:
> The following url is missed by uribl, eventhough medsavenow.com is
> listed. is it because of the "$$"?
3.0.4 finds it fine in my test. As usual, run with -D:
debug: uri found:
http://ar.atwola.com/redir/B0/NIGMELhw-OhjdGRhu9krS8hjdsxhHJM
The following url is missed by uribl, eventhough medsavenow.com is
listed. is it because of the "$$"?
href=3D""http://ar.atwola.com/redir/B0/NIGMELhw-OhjdGRhu9krS8hjdsxhHJMd7aZyBahYZOlB1rRxxNchtg$$/http://medsavenow.com/?name=3Drevup";>You
won't believe our prices!
Hi all,
I got one big problem with spamassassins spamd.
Qmail-scanner-queu semms not to submitt the -u flag to spamd. So if I
run spamd with the "-v -u vpopmail" option I get the following error:
---
2005-07-06 00:20:21 [6242] i: debug: using "Error: unable to
setuid/.spamas
Peter Marshall wrote:
I have been running spamassassin 3.0.2 for the last month or so. I have
bayes set up to run for each user. It is working very well. However, I
never get any missed marked spam (ie, messaged marked as SPAM that
should not have been), I only get a few messages that don't
Spam Assassin 3.0.4 works with milter-spamc 0.25, smf-spamd and MailScanner
Current.
Spam Assassin 3.1.0 only works MailScanner Current less than 10% .
How can I help to determine where the source of the problem is?
--
Member - Liberal International
This is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ici [EMAIL
Greg Allen wrote:
Looks like you confirm what I had suspected after searching the entire
Internet at least 10 times. :--)
So Procmail is indeed for local delivery only, not for email gateways.
Bummer...
that's why it is called an LDA (local delivery agent) :-)
you could try a nasty setup, whe
Hello Lorenzo,
Tuesday, July 5, 2005, 5:22:04 AM, you wrote:
LL> Hello,
LL> I receive some emails form a newsletter that is not spam.
LL> These emails go through SpamAssasin and they get this score:
LL> Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 2.0 required)
LL> I configured SpamAssasin with a 2.
Hello Bart,
Tuesday, July 5, 2005, 2:24:39 AM, you wrote:
BV> Hellow!
BV> I'm receiving mail with "XANA, L0RAAZEPAM, \/ALUUM, \/llGRA, CAALlS,
BV> LEVlTRRA, MER1DllA, ALPRAZZ0LAM, TRAMAD0OL, AMBllEN repeated wife" as
BV> subject, and while it gives several scores, none of them has anything to
BV
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daryl C. W. O'Shea writes:
> Brian Taber wrote:
> > As for the scores, score of 0 for PASS makes perfect sense, but a FAIL
> > should receive at least the same score as a SOFTFAIL, because a FAIL means
> > the email is definately from a forged sender
Bart Verwilst wrote:
> Hellow!
>
> I'm receiving mail with "XANA, L0RAAZEPAM, \/ALUUM, \/llGRA, CAALlS,
> LEVlTRRA, MER1DllA, ALPRAZZ0LAM, TRAMAD0OL, AMBllEN repeated wife" as
> subject, and while it gives several scores, none of them has anything to
> do with the topic. Only because it's HTML mai
Brian Taber wrote:
Figured that what are the mass-check's you mentioned? Is there
somewhere I can go to find out more? Is there a way to update
spamassassin with the newest scores?
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/MassCheck
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RescoreDetails
http://wik
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 5, 2005, at 10:43 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have users who's mail is sent through a proxy server before it
gets filtered through SpamAssassin.
The proxy server rewrites the header of the message and then sends
it on. When our SpamAs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 5, 2005, at 8:37 AM, Jerry Van Brimmer wrote:
I also set my bayes to score 5 points for a 99 score, that gets
the stock
scam guys who think they are just too slick by using a different
clean IP
every time.
I'm just learning how to use SA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 5, 2005, at 7:28 AM, Thomas Kinghorn [MTNNS -Rosebank] wrote:
Hi List.
Since upgrading, more spam gets through.
See X-Spam-Status:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=4.4 tests=BAYES_50,DCC_CHECK,
HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE,J_CHI
Brian Taber wrote:
As for the scores, score of 0 for PASS makes perfect sense, but a FAIL
should receive at least the same score as a SOFTFAIL, because a FAIL means
the email is definately from a forged sender (on the other hand the FAIL
may be because the person who created the SPF records had n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have been running spamassassin 3.0.2 for the last month or so. I
have bayes set up to run for each user. It is working very well.
However, I never get any missed marked spam (ie, messaged marked as
SPAM that should not have been), I only ge
Since I am using spamassassin via MailScanner, I dug into my config files
more (took a while) I found an option in spam.assassin.prefs.conf called
envelope_sender_header that was not set properly, now all SPF checks
work...
As for the scores, score of 0 for PASS makes perfect sense, but a FAIL
sh
Looks like you confirm what I had suspected after searching the entire
Internet at least 10 times. :--)
So Procmail is indeed for local delivery only, not for email gateways.
Bummer...
Ok, so I will try amavisd-new next.
Thank you for your time!
-Original Message-
From: mouss [mailt
>...
>
>On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:48:22 +
>Ronan McGlue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> what is the official stance on using razor/dcc for not personal use.
>> I've looked at the 3.1 docs and its off by default. I cant seem to
>> find any liscencing info on either site. Anyone got any URLS/ info
Lorenzo Lucioni wrote:
> I configured SpamAssasin with a 2.0 points as threshold because many
> spams came with a score lower than 3.0.
The spam scoring 3.0 is your problem. Fix that.
Do NOT drive your score threshold through the floor to try to catch spam, as all
you're going to wind up doing i
"Mike Keller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 07/05/2005 02:32:29 PM:
> After rebuilding my sendmail.cf with the following:
>
> INPUT_MAIL_FILTER(`smtp-vilter', `S=unix:/var/smtp-vilter/smtp-
> vilter.sock, F=T, T=C:15m;S:10m;R:10m;E:15m')
>
> I am still getting some messages in that ha
Dr Robert Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 07/05/2005 02:13:01 PM:
> My error...I meant to say the milter-spamc v 0.25
>
>
> On Jul 5, 2005, at 11:24 AM, Andy Jezierski wrote:
>
> >
> > Dr Robert Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/05/2005
> > 10:22:45 AM:
> >
> > > In my initial foray i
After rebuilding my sendmail.cf with the
following:
INPUT_MAIL_FILTER(`smtp-vilter',
`S=unix:/var/smtp-vilter/smtp-vilter.sock, F=T, T=C:15m;S:10m;R:10m;E:15m')
I am still getting some messages in that have a 0.0
score for both the message and the threshold. I have not had a spam
Michael Moyse wrote on Tue, 05 Jul 2005 17:10:07 +0100:
> Damn it I might even block the entire IP range and domain for Mexico.
That is what I mean. Blacklisting single sources doesn't really help
unless they are known spam throwers. That mail server obviously just got
abused by a spammer. He s
My error...I meant to say the milter-spamc v 0.25
On Jul 5, 2005, at 11:24 AM, Andy Jezierski wrote:
Dr Robert Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/05/2005 10:22:45 AM:
> In my initial foray into Spamassassin (2.63 to start, V3 later), I am
> trying to get the spamc component linking sendma
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I just sent myself two test-mails from my home machine, and realised
that they were both triggering the RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL and
RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL tests, and scoring alarmingly high, but brought down
again due to the Bayes tests:
-- Complete Mail
Felix Natter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am experimenting with spamassassin (3.0.x) settings and for this
> purpose I would like to see why some messages were not recognized as spam
> (which
> tests matched and how many points total), just like the information I get to
> see for positives.
> Is there a wa
Michael wrote:
> When I receive spam msgs I have this line in headers autolearn=failed .I
> tried to look it on wiki but I couldn't find anything. I know it that
> the SA cannot gain lock on bayes database. I checked maillog file but I
> couldn't find anything that was suspicious. Anybody could he
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:33:09PM +0200, Sander Holthaus - Orange XL wrote:
>
>>That's indeed vague. They talk about personal use and about commercially
>>embedded software, but where does this leave and ISP? It also means that
>>anyone not paying license fee's has ab
Michael Moyse wrote:
It does because
a) I never expect to receive email from anyone in Mexico
why not setup a list of senders you expect to get mail from and reject
anybody else? that would be far more effective (you don't even need to
use SA).
what about people who travel? should they keep
Craig Jackson wrote:
See that return path? The domain ends in .mx
That's irrelevant. most spam comes from the us. if country blocking was
the right approach, the first candidate isn't mexico, but the us. That
will reduce the spam rate significantly. but that would also be just
unreasonabl
This looks good and I think I may try this perl module. It seems that
it's geared towards a single workstation and not a network of machines.
They say that you point your client to localhost, which means that each
machine must have this installed. How are you guys running this so that
you can have
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:33:09PM +0200, Sander Holthaus - Orange XL wrote:
> That's indeed vague. They talk about personal use and about commercially
> embedded software, but where does this leave and ISP? It also means that
> anyone not paying license fee's has absolutely no guarentee that t
Yes, I must have let that one slip while I
was editing it the other day. Sorry, I will rebuild my sendmail.cf and
monitor. Sometimes it takes a second pair of eyes to point out the obvious.
From: Andy Jezierski
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 12:45
PM
To: Mik
"Mike Keller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 07/05/2005 11:29:41 AM:
[snip]
> Sendmail Milter Config:
>
> INPUT_MAIL_FILTER(`smtp-vilter', `S=unix:/var/smtp-vilter/smtp-
> vilter.sock, F=T, T=C:15m;S:10m;R:10ms;E:15m')dnl
>
> I have all timeouts for smtp-vilter backends
(clamd, spamd) set at
>
> Ronan McGlue wrote:
> > what is the official stance on using razor/dcc for not personal use.
> > I've looked at the 3.1 docs and its off by default. I cant seem to
> > find any liscencing info on either site. Anyone got any URLS/ info
> > regarding this issue. Im using it at a uni here sitewide
First, let me apologize if this has been discussed
before. I just signed up today.
I am running Spamassassin 3.0.4 on Perl 5.8.6 on OpenBSD
3.7. Overall, I am very happy running this on a production smtp gateway
for our M$ Exchange Environment. I do have a weird problem with scores a
File-permission issue?
From: Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 6:21 PMTo:
users@spamassassin.apache.orgSubject:
autolearn=failed
When I receive spam msgs I have this line in
headers autolearn=failed .I tried to look it on wiki but I couldn't
Ronan McGlue wrote:
> what is the official stance on using razor/dcc for not personal use.
> I've looked at the 3.1 docs and its off by default. I cant seem to find
> any liscencing info on either site. Anyone got any URLS/ info regarding
> this issue. Im using it at a uni here sitewide so Id like
As far as I know, the licensing issues have to do with people selling
antispam sollutions. E.g. you can download and install DCC/Razor and turn
them on in SpamAssassin, but you cannot sell (SpamAssassin with) Razor/DCC
as part of an anti-spam sollution without paying license fee's.
Kind Regards,
S
When I receive spam msgs I have this line in
headers autolearn=failed .I tried to look it on wiki but I couldn't find
anything. I know it that the SA cannot gain lock on bayes database. I
checked maillog file but I couldn't find anything that was suspicious.
Anybody could help me with this
On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:48:22 +
Ronan McGlue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> what is the official stance on using razor/dcc for not personal use.
> I've looked at the 3.1 docs and its off by default. I cant seem to
> find any liscencing info on either site. Anyone got any URLS/ info
> regarding t
Michael Moyse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
on 07/05/2005 11:10:07 AM:
> Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>
> >Michael Moyse wrote on Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:54:27 +0100:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Why even bother processing it at all?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Because the next mail will come from another host? Blacklisting
a sin
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Michael Moyse wrote on Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:54:27 +0100:
Why even bother processing it at all?
Because the next mail will come from another host? Blacklisting a single
Mexican mail provider doesn't help much against future spam.
Kai
It does because
a) I nev
Michael Moyse wrote on Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:54:27 +0100:
> Why even bother processing it at all?
Because the next mail will come from another host? Blacklisting a single
Mexican mail provider doesn't help much against future spam.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive I
Thomas Booms wrote on Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:52:35 +0200:
> Where can I read about how to train Bayes correctly? I'm sure that I
> havent understood the work of Bayes correctly.
Simply leave the scores at the default! All about Bayes in SA ->
spamassassin.org, wiki.spamassassin.org
Kai
--
Kai S
what is the official stance on using razor/dcc for not personal use.
I've looked at the 3.1 docs and its off by default. I cant seem to find
any liscencing info on either site. Anyone got any URLS/ info regarding
this issue. Im using it at a uni here sitewide so Id like to forgo a
lawsuit...
Thomas Booms wrote on Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:23:50 +0200:
> BAYES_40 I have
> set to 5.
Geeze. You should NOT do this! BAYES_40 is a very slight sign for *ham*.
You corrupt your Bayes db with such a value!
If you don't expect Mail from Mexiko, simply put mx in your MTA's access
database.
If it's
Lorenzo Lucioni wrote on Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:22:04 +0200:
> I would suggest to the person who send this newsletter to apply a correction
> to his
emails to avoid the:
> "1.2 MIME_HTML_ONLY BODY: Message only has text/html MIME parts"
> but I don't understand what it does mean. Can you
Hi!
I am sure that SURLB and URIBL would catch this now, but what rules
would you recommend to catch this? We do not use bayes, so this is not
an option right now.
URIBL_AB_SURBL 0.42, URIBL_JP_SURBL 4.26, URIBL_SBL 4.26
Bye,
Raymond.
>-Original Message-
>From: Eric Persson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 3:44 PM
>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: post-filter messages?
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I just installed spamassassin together with qmail, qmail-scanner and
>clam on a server to try it out. I am
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:44 AM
>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: Forged outlook headers
>
>
>
>We have users who's mail is sent through a proxy server before it gets
>filtered through SpamAssassin.
Dr Robert Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 07/05/2005 10:22:45 AM:
> In my initial foray into Spamassassin (2.63 to start, V3 later), I
am
> trying to get the spamc component linking sendmail and spamd to work.
I
> have verified that the spamc->spamd is working by running
it manually
> on t
In my initial foray into Spamassassin (2.63 to start, V3 later), I am
trying to get the spamc component linking sendmail and spamd to work. I
have verified that the spamc->spamd is working by running it manually
on the command line. I have sendmail compiled with -DMILTER, but I seem
to be havi
On Tuesday 05 July 2005 15:41, [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
> Received: from 204-161-126-200.fibertel.com.ar ([200.126.161.204])
> by xxx.atco.ca with smtp (Exim )
> id 1Dpnum-0001Yc-RY; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 07:56:46 -0600
Deny traffic from \d{1,3}-\d{1,3}-\d{1,3}-\d{1,3}\.fibertel\.com\.ar perhaps.
>
Thomas Booms wrote:
Hi all,
I have the following text of a spam not marked as spam. BAYES_40 I
have set to 5. After I got it, I've increased the value of RCVD_BY_IP
to 5 in the hope, that it works. Which other solutions are there to
mark these mails as spam?
I saw that more and more spams
Craig Jackson wrote:
See that return path? The domain ends in .mx
I have rule that checks for that type of domain and gives the email 5
points for it.
Not all Mexicans are spammers, you know :-) Beware of rules like that
which arbitrarily discriminate against foreign countries.
In this case
Andy Jezierski schrieb:
Thomas Booms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/05/2005 09:23:50 AM:
> Hi all,
>
> I have the following text of a spam not marked as spam. BAYES_40 I have
> set to 5. After I got it, I've increased the value of RCVD_BY_IP to
5 in
> the hope, that it works. Which other so
We have users who's mail is sent through a proxy server before it gets
filtered through SpamAssassin.
The proxy server rewrites the header of the message and then sends it
on. When our SpamAssassin
server filters the message it reads it as a forged outlook header and
assigns it 3 points.
W
Title: Any ideas on what would catch this?
I am sure that SURLB and URIBL would catch this now, but what rules would you recommend to catch this? We do not use bayes, so this is not an option right now.
Thanks.
Microsoft Mail Internet Headers Version 2.0
Received: from xxx.atco.com ([xx.x
Thomas Booms wrote:
Hi all,
I have the following text of a spam not marked as spam. BAYES_40 I have
set to 5. After I got it, I've increased the value of RCVD_BY_IP to 5 in
the hope, that it works. Which other solutions are there to mark these
mails as spam?
I saw that more and more spams c
Thomas Booms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
on 07/05/2005 09:23:50 AM:
> Hi all,
>
> I have the following text of a spam not marked as spam. BAYES_40 I
have
> set to 5. After I got it, I've increased the value of RCVD_BY_IP to
5 in
> the hope, that it works. Which other solutions are there to mark
Hi all,
I have the following text of a spam not marked as spam. BAYES_40 I have
set to 5. After I got it, I've increased the value of RCVD_BY_IP to 5 in
the hope, that it works. Which other solutions are there to mark these
mails as spam?
I saw that more and more spams coming through which a
>-Original Message-
>From: Daniel Quinlan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 5:18 PM
>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: Re: SpamAssassin 3.1.0-pre3 released!
>
>
>Chris Santerre wrote on Mon, 4 Jul 2005 12:39:48 -0400 :
>
>>> Just a heads up to all, multi.uri
- Start Original Message -
From: "Greg Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Subject: RE: More spam since upgrading
> I also set my bayes to score 5 points for a 99 score, that gets the stock
> scam guys who think they are just too slick by using a different clean IP
> every time.
Hello,
I'm
Thomas Kinghorn [MTNNS -Rosebank] wrote on Tue, 5 Jul 2005 13:28:00 +0200:
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=4.4 tests=BAYES_50,DCC_CHECK,
>
> HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE,J_CHICKENPOX_33,J_CHICKENPOX_41,MILLION_USD,
> MISSING_HEADERS,NIGERIAN_BODY1,RISK_FREE,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS,
Either I'm missi
Daniel Quinlan wrote on 04 Jul 2005 14:18:08 -0700:
> He is
> advertising the confusingly-named "URIBL.com" blacklist which is an
> alternative to SURBL.
Oh, well, yes, I indeed confused this. I thought it's just a somewhat
different view on the same data. Thanks!
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin
Hello,
I receive some emails form a newsletter that is not spam. These emails go
through SpamAssasin and they get this score:
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 2.0 required)
pts rule name description
-- --
Greg Allen wrote:
[snip]
The only thing that might be unusual about my install is that the server
does not hold email. I pass all email to another server/s downstream, so
there are no mailboxes or user accounts on this server.
so email will be sent from postfix to the end server, and won't be
I have been running spamassassin 3.0.2 for the last month or so. I have
bayes set up to run for each user. It is working very well. However, I
never get any missed marked spam (ie, messaged marked as SPAM that
should not have been), I only get a few messages that don't get flagged.
My probl
Title: Upgrade woes
Hi List.
Since upgrading, more spam gets through.
See X-Spam-Status:
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_Part_8034_7061452
On Jul 5, 2005, at 2:59 AM, Jesse Shumaker wrote:
Here is my situation. Currently, our e-mail isn't managed within
our organization. We have a third party ISP who is hosting the e-
mail for us. We simply configure our Outlook clients to
authenticate to their SMTP/POP servers. Is there a way
Hi,
I am experimenting with spamassassin (3.0.x) settings and for this
purpose
I would like to see why some messages were not recognized as spam (which
tests
matched and how many points total), just like the information I get to
see
for positives.
Is there a way to achieve this?
thanks in advance
Thomas Kinghorn [MTNNS -Rosebank] wrote on Tue, 5 Jul 2005 07:37:54 +0200:
> Does anyone else see the same trend?
No. Check if you still get all the same tests run and have the same
scoreas than before.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://ww
Jesse Shumaker wrote on Mon, 4 Jul 2005 23:59:51 -0700:
> Is there a way that I could setup a SpamAssassin box at each of my
> sites to filter each Outlook clients' outgoing and incoming mail?
outgoing: use Mailscanner and then forward to the smarthost of your ISP.
incoming: don't know, either t
Hellow!
I'm receiving mail with "XANA, L0RAAZEPAM, \/ALUUM, \/llGRA, CAALlS,
LEVlTRRA, MER1DllA, ALPRAZZ0LAM, TRAMAD0OL, AMBllEN repeated wife" as
subject, and while it gives several scores, none of them has anything to
do with the topic. Only because it's HTML mail, received from an ip, ...
Jesse Shumaker wrote:
Jesse,
It would be just like a web proxy. The outlook clients are redirectd to
the spamassassin box which filters the e-mail and forwards/relays the
requests onto our ISP's e-mail servers. If you can assist me at all with
this I would be greatly appreciated.
you can tr
I am in a non-profit organization so we are very tight on money. A
third party solution may be out of the question, depending the cost.
Would Spamassassin have to grab all the e-mail from the ISP and then I
would configure each client to access the spamassassin to download
their mail? If there is a
85 matches
Mail list logo
