On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 08:18:16AM +0200, Sven Riedel wrote:
> header __X Content-Type =~ /^(message|multipart)/i
> rawbody __Y /\S/
> meta Z ( !X && !Y )
>
> and yet the rule triggers for me. Doing a
Of course. __X != X ... :)
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"The question is to what extent par
Hi,
a while back someone kindly posted a rule here that matches on
empty mails:
header __X Content-Type =~ /^(message|multipart)/i
rawbody __Y /\S/
meta Z ( !X && !Y )
Now I find that Z matches on all mails - investigation shows
that Y matches on all non-whitespaces as it should, and X
doesn't
>
> How do you (make and) balance the calls to the AV servers? How do you
> (make
> and) balance the calls to the spamd machines? I am very interested in
> these
> details!
We just call them in order case on the connection line. On two of the 4
SMTP gateways we use node 1 as the primary and
Hum. I'm a little confused by that SA score stuff on the bottom of the
message. If it refers to a message that should be spam you have two serious
problems. If it referred to a message from this list you may have a serious
problem and a less serious problem.
pts rule name descript
Mike Cavanagh wrote:
Hum. I can see some messages are being caught via the Bayes test, but I
would think Bayes would find many more as I have close to 5000 SPAM in
the Bayes system.
I get at most 15 messages a day flagged as SPAM while I receive approx.
100 messages a day as non-SPAM but shoul
OT: RBL for dynamic "no reverse DNS" lookups
I'm trying to find an RBL which will return a standard RBL return code (like
"127.0.0.2") if/when the IP passed to the RBL doesn't have a reverse DNS
entry.
(1) I know that SA doesn't have a need for this as another function is
already available in SA
Hum. I can see some messages are being caught via the Bayes test, but
I would think Bayes would find many more as I have close to 5000 SPAM
in the Bayes system.
I get at most 15 messages a day flagged as SPAM while I receive approx.
100 messages a day as non-SPAM but should be flagged as SPAM.
> What does this message mean??
> debug: cannot use bayes on this message; not enough usable tokens
found
> debug: bayes: not scoring message, returning undef
Unless you are seeing this a whole lot, I don't think you are doing anything
wrong. I think this just means that the particular ma
--- "Gary W. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We have 4 front end servers running postfix. These servers call and AV
> process on two additional AV servers behind the wall. Then these
> servers
"these" being the AV server calls spamd or it goes back to the MTA first?
How do you (make and)
What does this message mean??
debug: cannot use bayes on this message; not enough usable tokens found
debug: bayes: not scoring message, returning undef
I am using MimeDefang Ver. 2.52 and SpamAssassin Ver. 3.0.4
Below is:
current status of bayes database (sa-learn --dump=magic)
sa-m
--- Charles Sprickman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, email builder wrote:
>
> > Technically, this should be feasible with just plain DNS load balancing,
> but
> > in our current medium/low budget scenario, we don't have the rackspace to
> > have numerous boxes that are dedicat
We have 4 front end servers running postfix. These servers call and AV
process on two additional AV servers behind the wall. Then these
servers call spamd on two additional servers behind the wall. Those two
servers have a simple MySQL cluster (running Linux-HA and DRBD).
In all we have 8 box
Pretty much answered in my following mail. In general each child might us
30-60mb under NORMAL circumstances, so the amount of memory on your
machine
will determine the upper limit for number of children.
so 8 would be max on a 512meg system (what I have). I still have free ram
after firing
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, email builder wrote:
Technically, this should be feasible with just plain DNS load balancing, but
in our current medium/low budget scenario, we don't have the rackspace to
have numerous boxes that are dedicated ONLY to SA/clam, thus our desire is to
figure out a way to *WEIGH
--- Jason Frisvold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/1/05, email builder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Even if I had forgotten the -A, I think I would have been seeing
> connection
> > refused notices, but right now, it just seems to time out. I'm pretty
> sure
> > this is a LVS question more
From: "Dhanny Kosasih" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I tested my qmail wtih more than 14000 spam (i used qmail-inject in my
> script). If i use QSheff + ClamAV + SpamAssassin, my server process
> 14000 emails in 1 hour, and if i only use qmail my server process 14000
> emails in 1/3 hours. How can i incre
From: "Alexandre Cruz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hi all,
>
> I do understand that this can sound as a very newbie question, however i
> have a doubt that i can't find an answer. We are using Spamassassin with
> procmail/sendmail. It is working fine, however, spam mail is being
> forwarded for a mail
> is it better to run five children with 20 connections each, or 20 children
with five connections each?
Pretty much answered in my following mail. In general each child might us
30-60mb under NORMAL circumstances, so the amount of memory on your machine
will determine the upper limit for number
> I tested my qmail wtih more than 14000 spam (i used qmail-inject in my
> script). If i use QSheff + ClamAV + SpamAssassin, my server process
> 14000 emails in 1 hour, and if i only use qmail my server process 14000
> emails in 1/3 hours. How can i increase my server performance ? I don't
> unders
> so you are running 30 per child and 6 children? 180 total. how many
messages a day are you handling. I upped my children from 5 to 15 thinking
that would help but it hasn't. I was thinking of taken connections down to
5 or 6 on 15 children. maybe I have it backwards? I don't have anything
e
Matthew Yette wrote:
Dankos,
Put this into your /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf:
user_scores_sql_custom_querySELECT preference, value FROM _TABLE_
WHERE username = _USERNAME_ OR username = '@GLOBAL' OR username =
_DOMAIN_ ORDER BY username ASC
That will make per-user preferences priority,
is it better to run five children with 20 connections each, or 20 children
with five connections each?
Frank M. CookAssociation Computer Services, Inc.http://www.acsplus.com
I tested my qmail wtih more than 14000 spam (i used qmail-inject in my
script). If i use QSheff + ClamAV + SpamAssassin, my server process
14000 emails in 1 hour, and if i only use qmail my server process 14000
emails in 1/3 hours. How can i increase my server performance ? I don't
understand w
Most strange. Could you give us the listing frop top or the like?
The normal case, as you are probably aware, is that the children get fat
(use a lot of memory) and your system goes into thraashing.
This sounds like you have some other problem.
Are you using awl (it is on by default in 3.x) or
Herb Martin wrote:
>> When people ask why I haven't upgraded from 2.64 yet... I'm waiting
>> until a week goes by without a new thread about runaway / way-slow /
>> resource-eating SA 3.0.X processes! :-)
>>
>
> I suspect your wait is over 3.10 (due any day now) + 1 week
> should make you happy.
Martin Tanzer wrote:
> My setup:
> Debian 3.1 (sarge) with the provided spamassassin package (3.0.3-2)
> Postfix, spamassassin bound to postfix (no amavisd-new)
> There are no users on the machine, all mails are forwarded to another
> mailserver trough the transport file.
>
> Any ideas?
It seems
I do understand that this can sound as a very newbie question, however i
have a doubt that i can't find an answer. We are using Spamassassin with
procmail/sendmail. It is working fine, however, spam mail is being
forwarded for a mail account, which is no longer valid. I've been
looking where this
At 09:00 AM 8/2/2005, you wrote:
Hi all,
I do understand that this can sound as a very newbie question,
however i have a doubt that i can't find an answer. We are using
Spamassassin with procmail/sendmail. It is working fine, however,
spam mail is being forwarded for a mail account, which is
Alexandre Cruz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I do understand that this can sound as a very newbie question, however i
> have a doubt that i can’t find an answer. We are using Spamassassin with
> procmail/sendmail. It is working fine, however, spam mail is being
> forwarded for a mail account, which
Hi all,
I do
understand that this can sound as a very newbie question, however i have a
doubt that i can’t find an answer. We are using Spamassassin with
procmail/sendmail. It is working fine, however, spam mail is being forwarded
for a mail account, which is no longer valid. I’ve been
My setup is as follows:
FreeBSD 4.10, SpamAssassin 3.0.4, Perl 5.8
Using Bayes and a pile 'o SARE rules.
It scanned 34484 messages last night and the only time we see lags is when
the bayes database is expiring.
The startup script is as follows:
/usr/local/bin/spamd --max-children=6 --max-c
> > When people ask why I haven't upgraded from 2.64 yet... I'm waiting
> > until a week goes by without a new thread about runaway /
> way-slow /
> > resource-eating SA 3.0.X processes! :-)
> >
I suspect your wait is over 3.10 (due any day now) + 1 week
should make you happy.
Improved thread
Sorry, no, that didn't come out right. There's only six children running at
any time. Each will process 30 messages, then restart. The machine processed
about 3200 messages yesterday, so each child restarted about once every
2.5-3 hours.
Mike Jackson
Tech Administrator, Datahost
www.datahost.c
so you are running 30 per child and 6 children? 180 total. how
many messages a day are you handling. I upped my children from 5 to 15
thinking that would help but it hasn't. I was thinking of taken
connections down to 5 or 6 on 15 children. maybe I have it
backwards? I don't have anyth
Pierre Thomson wrote:
I'm running SA 3.0.4 on OpenBSD with Perl 5.8.6 & Exim V4.52.
I'm noticing that SA seems to have a big problem with child
processes just "running away", never terminating and eating CPU.
My mailservers can't cope, and I'm looking at having to switch
off SA. (Not something
> I'm running SA 3.0.4 on OpenBSD with Perl 5.8.6 & Exim V4.52.
>
> I'm noticing that SA seems to have a big problem with child
> processes just "running away", never terminating and eating CPU.
>
> My mailservers can't cope, and I'm looking at having to switch
> off SA. (Not something I really wan
I've been fighting a problem which may turn out to be similar. my
spamassassin just starts falling behind and runaway threads could be the
cause. I'm going to try adjusting --max connections per child (check docs
for exact syntax). the default is 200. maybe someone else will jump in
with a
On 8/1/05, email builder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Even if I had forgotten the -A, I think I would have been seeing connection
> refused notices, but right now, it just seems to time out. I'm pretty sure
> this is a LVS question more than a spamc/d question, since I've no problems
> with the la
I'm running SA 3.0.4 on OpenBSD with Perl 5.8.6 & Exim V4.52.
I'm noticing that SA seems to have a big problem with child processes just
"running away", never terminating and eating CPU.
My mailservers can't cope, and I'm looking at having to switch off SA. (Not
something I really want to do..)
Dhanny Kosasih wrote:
Hi,
Any body know, how to install qmail + spamassassin + squirellmail
(can tell spam to spamassassin) ? And how to make spamassassin can
autolearn for spam ?
Regards,
dankos.
Here are two "toaster" documents I used:
http://sylvestre.ledru.info/howto/howto_qmail_vpo
> SARE_ADLTSUB2 Subject =~ /\b(?:blow|climax
>
|enlarg(e|ment)|fuck|inter+acial|lick|porn|penis|pervert|pussy|tits|tight|va
gina|virgins?)\b/i
>
> Fix the rule, don't ditch the \b's for such a broad rule..
>
> Besides, the whole rule is subject to all kinds of obfuscation tricks.
P.e.n.i.s
> still
41 matches
Mail list logo
