Hello,
Does anyone know if this will work:
bayes_ignore_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The docs don't say specifically if this kind of directive is allowed.
They do say that this kind of thing will work for whitelist_from.
Regards,
Devin
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Michael Moyse wrote on Fri, 08 Jul 2005 17:55:32 +0100:
To me it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck I'm probably wrong
and missing something here because I'm no expert so I'm happy to be
enlightened.
Ok, I enlighten you ;-) I hope I'm not wrong. Now that
Chavdar Videff wrote:
Hi List,
Our mailserver server serves about 100 users. Our config:
Sendmail+Procmail+SpamAssassin.
The question is:
If I got it right, we should run sa-learn for each user in order to benefit
from bayes. We intend to run a cron job for each user and do it at night by
JamesDR wrote:
Chavdar Videff wrote:
Hi List,
Our mailserver server serves about 100 users. Our config:
Sendmail+Procmail+SpamAssassin.
The question is:
If I got it right, we should run sa-learn for each user in order to
benefit from bayes. We intend to run a cron job for each user and do
On Monday 11 July 2005 14:50, JamesDR wrote:
Chavdar Videff wrote:
Hi List,
Our mailserver server serves about 100 users. Our config:
Sendmail+Procmail+SpamAssassin.
The question is:
If I got it right, we should run sa-learn for each user in order to
benefit from bayes. We intend to
Chavdar Videff wrote on Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:40:14 +0300:
If I got it right, we should run sa-learn for each user in order to benefit
from bayes. We intend to run a cron job for each user and do it at night by
supplying a daily snapshot of our spam and ham collections to sa-learn.
Do I
On Monday 11 July 2005 15:31, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Chavdar Videff wrote on Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:40:14 +0300:
If I got it right, we should run sa-learn for each user in order to
benefit from bayes. We intend to run a cron job for each user and do it
at night by supplying a daily snapshot of
At 04:43 AM 7/11/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Does anyone know if this will work:
bayes_ignore_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The docs don't say specifically if this kind of directive is allowed.
They do say that this kind of thing will work for whitelist_from.
We all got your message the
Dr Robert Young wrote:
Is there a particular port and/or protocol (TCP/UDP) that must be
opened on any firewalls that might be on the network for the plugin to
work?
You don't need to open any ports, however you must be able to resolve DNS
queries.
In general you can test it by using host
Title: Bypass URI check
Hi All,
I have received a few messages like the following. This asks the receiver to copy and past the link into their web browser. Since the href is missing, there is no URI check. That sucks, because the URIBL is my best friend right now (love black). We are close
Michael W Cocke wrote:
Does anyone have a rule to chech the envelope To: against the header
to: ? I'm sure that there's a reason why it's allowed to be different,
but it doesn't apply here, and almost half of the spam that gets thru
everything else would get stopped by that.
No. It's
Title: Bypass URI check
I'm thinking
it may be time for SARE to look at this phrase:
"then copy //
paste the below page into your window:
"
I'll see what I can
do with it.
--Chris (I also love
the black ;)
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
Joe Flowers wrote:
I don't know if this will help anyone or not, but I wanted to report
back just in case.
In early April, I completely unhinged the dividing line between what SA
score is used to mark a message as spam or ham (5.00 = default). This
allows the system and this dividing line
Does anyone know If I can use Spammain with GMS (Gordano
Mail Software for Linux)
In theory, you could use MailScanner as a proxy in front of GMS to run
SpamAssassin before the message gets to GMS.
And, if I recall correctly (I haven't used GMS for several years), I
think you can use their
Matt Kettler wrote:
The only problem I see with this approach is that it treats false positives and
false negatives as being equally bad.
We do get many more false negatives than false positives, even though we
don't get false positives very often - they are rare.
We certainly don't get
On 16:56, Mon 11 Jul 05, Karl.Oulmi wrote:
Hi,
I always have a box with postfix/amavis and Spamassin running.
Now, I'd like to run sa-learn in order my users (~500) learn Spam Ham
to Spamassassin.
The idea is the following.
On every mail passed through my mailserver, a header or a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
There's another thing worth noting -- the SpamAssassin score distribution
for hams and spams isn't even.
If you draw a graph of hams and spams, plotting the number of mails in
each category as the vertical axis and the score they get as teh
Thanks Jason!
That's good, new info for me. That'll help me *at the very least*
visualize what I am trying to do a little better. I've been very curious
to know what the rough shapes of those graphs look like.
Joe
Justin Mason wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joe Flowers wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
The only problem I see with this approach is that it treats false
positives and
false negatives as being equally bad.
We do get many more false negatives than false positives, even though we
don't get false positives very often - they are rare.
Chavdar Videff wrote on Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:13:44 +0300:
If there is a way to set up a single bayes database I would prefer that
There is one, just look in the SA documentation. (documentation for
local.cf should do.)
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet
I repeat myself ;-)
It seems you are not using *any* custom rules. You may want to check out
RDJ and SARE.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
IE-Center: http://ie5.de http://msie.winware.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
the real-world figures can be seen for various thresholds in
the rules/STATISTICS*.txt files...
- --j.
Matt Kettler writes:
Joe Flowers wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
The only problem I see with this approach is that it treats false
positives
From: Chavdar Videff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday 11 July 2005 14:50, JamesDR wrote:
Chavdar Videff wrote:
Hi List,
Our mailserver server serves about 100 users. Our config:
Sendmail+Procmail+SpamAssassin.
The question is:
If I got it right, we should run sa-learn for each
Forget about this. Most of you users will only report spams,
not ham, they're going to screw the bayes database. As a
consequence, you'll have more spam, or more fp.
You should find another solution or educate your users (but
it takes too much time) so they feed correctly the bayesian
From: Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joe Flowers wrote:
I don't know if this will help anyone or not, but I wanted to report
back just in case.
In early April, I completely unhinged the dividing line between what SA
score is used to mark a message as spam or ham (5.00 = default). This
score of -2.1532284. I have the divding line set at 30% of the
distance between the average ham score and average spam score (30% above
the average ham score). So, the dividing line is currently floating
around 0.55416414.
The only problem I see with this approach is that it treats
Matt:
I know you know a lot more about this than I do, but for what it's
worth, you're impressions/intuitions are very close to mine.
Originally back in April, I started off using the average of the
means, but that let through way too much spam.
So, what I have now is it set to 30% above the
There's another thing worth noting -- the SpamAssassin score distribution
for hams and spams isn't even.
I don't necessarily see that those particular curve shapes necessarily in
any way invalidate this method, although they do bias the method somewhat.
The two curves are essentially smooth
jdow wrote:
The greater the separation choke the
better the results for a decision point between them.
But anything you can do that widens the
typical score distribution between ham and spam is a good thing.
Amen
All it needs is port 53 TCP and UDP open (outbound),
depending on what
firewall product you use, depends on how. A bit of Google with what
ports on what product will yield what you should need.
One thing to note... if your firewall is proxying for you, make sure it
doesn't think it's
A few weeks ago I'd have said Easy, Ducky! Then I ran into DoveCot
that uses an indexed almost mbox file. There is no way to do it other
than good guess. However, for a traditional UNIX mbox file you should
be able to nail it perfectly simply looking for the From feature. The
dirt stupid mail
On my personal server, I'm running SA 3.0.4 with the user prefs, Bayes, and
AWL in a MySQL database (mostly because it would be cooler that way). On
my employer's server, I'm running the same SA version, but with file-based
DBs and user prefs. We're going to be rolling out doing filtering for
Hello,
I set up spamassassin to work with procmail according to instructions.
Here is what is in ~/.procmailrc:
#SPAM ASSASSIN SECTION
:0fw: spamd.lock
* 256000
| /usr/sbin/spamd
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*
almost-certainly-spam
:0:
*
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, Matthias Fuhrmann wrote:
[...]
# jm: do not...
the lines from Bayes.pm fits to the error messages. didnt checked
PerMsgStatus.pm, but i guess its the same issue.
can someone explain the difference or the impact to the problem, described
above?
what about replacing
Joe Flowers wrote on Mon, 11 Jul 2005 12:09:29 -0400:
We are very glad and happy about this concept and implementation.
Well, the big question is: How many of your spam messages score between
the default 5 and your floating score? If it is many there's obviously
something wrong with your
Loren Wilton wrote on Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:30:07 -0700:
Which of course means that by picking the ratio value you can pick pretty
much any fp/fn ratio you want.
Only if the distribution was equal.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services:
jdow wrote:
A few weeks ago I'd have said Easy, Ducky! Then I ran into DoveCot
that uses an indexed almost mbox file. There is no way to do it
other than good guess. However, for a traditional UNIX mbox file
you should be able to nail it perfectly simply looking for the From
feature. The dirt
Cami wrote:
SQL simply doesnt scale very well for bayes. We have a serverfarm of
12 spamassassin servers and storing bayes in SQL. We see on average
about 4000 queries per second. The MySQL server has been optimized
to hell and back and is running on high-end hardware,but just simply
Kai Schaetzl wrote on Mon, 11 Jul 2005 22:31:29 +0200:
With the default of 5 we get almost none, not even one per day.
That was about FPs. Wrong. We don't get *any* FPs. We do not get even one
*FN* per day.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services:
Hi,
We recently changed some of our network topology so that we are temporarily
connecting with spamc to spamd over a regular external network connection (we
usually keep it inside our LAN, but this is a temporary thing... don't ask).
Unfortunately, spamd stops (mostly) responding it seems.
BTW, if anyone knows a command line program that can easy run thu a
bunch of mbox files and tell how many messages are in them, I will report
back how many ham and how many spam messages that I have fed to bayes.
Well, I thought this might give some good stats on the FP:FN ratio, but
I
Matt Kettler wrote:
Although by looking at _check_whitelist, I wonder if it works the way
the docs say. The docs claim it's file glob and not regex, but
_check_whitelist looks a lot like it does a regex.
_check_whitelist does use a regexp to do the matching but the config
parser
fyi, if you're using Fedora Core --
http://blog.dave.org.uk/archives/000715.html
totally unconfirmed, but worth noting in case that really is the
case.
--j.
Joe Flowers wrote:
BTW, if anyone knows a command line program that can easy run thu a
bunch of mbox files and tell how many messages are in them, I will
report back how many ham and how many spam messages that I have fed to
bayes. It's far from perfect, but it may offer some interesting info
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi All,
I have received a few messages like the following. This asks the
receiver to copy and past the link into their web browser. Since the
href is missing, there is no URI check. That sucks, because the URIBL
is my best friend right now (love black). We are close
Justin Mason wrote:
fyi, if you're using Fedora Core --
http://blog.dave.org.uk/archives/000715.html
totally unconfirmed, but worth noting in case that really is the
case.
My copy of Fedora Core 4 has required_hits 5 in local.cf using the
distribution's RPM for Spamassassin. rpm -Va made no
Hello Chavdar,
Monday, July 11, 2005, 3:40:14 AM, you wrote:
CV Hi List,
CV Our mailserver server serves about 100 users. Our config:
CV Sendmail+Procmail+SpamAssassin.
CV The question is:
CV If I got it right, we should run sa-learn for each user in order to benefit
CV from bayes. We intend
For those of you running large sites ( we have about 12,000 users, with
210,000 messages a day) what do you have for a bayes_expiry_max_db_size?
Also is there any way to see the count of spam and ham messages that are in
the bayes database, I can't seem to find any info on that. I want to make
Andrew,
Andrew Ott wrote:
Also is there any way to see the count of spam and ham messages that are in
the bayes database, I can't seem to find any info on that. I want to make
sure there are a lot in there before I turn the bayes rules on.
If you run spamassassin --lint -D you should see a
49 matches
Mail list logo
