From: "Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Friday 19 August 2005 09:54 am, Matt Kettler wrote:
>Although this is a standalone box with no windows on it at all, guess I
> could set one up anyway.
Setting up clamav is quick and easy, and best of all, free.
If you've got SA 3.x, there's even a clamAV
I just switched over to Cyrus IMAP - and it didn't occur to me I'd need
to change several ways I report spam, due to the mailstore format.
I wonder whom else is using Cyrus IMAP here, and how you may be handling
this.
Thanks.
On Friday 19 August 2005 09:54 am, Matt Kettler wrote:
> >Although this is a standalone box with no windows on it at all, guess I
> > could set one up anyway.
>
> Setting up clamav is quick and easy, and best of all, free.
>
> If you've got SA 3.x, there's even a clamAV plugin so you can get SA to
From: "Christian Recktenwald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
My SA 3.0.0 installation refuses to learn any more.
I only got "learned from 0 message(s) (1 message(s) examined)."
for about three weeks now. I really doubt it actually learned
anything about ham and spam yet. ;-)
I bet your mailboxes are in
Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
Hey all,
I'd like to run one spamd box for many clients, using SQL user prefs.
Is there a way to have spamd use different domain names -- or have
spamc pass the `hostname' of the machine along?
basically I will have a different sql userpref for [EMAIL PROTE
My SA 3.0.0 installation refuses to learn any more.
I only got "learned from 0 message(s) (1 message(s) examined)."
for about three weeks now. I really doubt it actually learned
anything about ham and spam yet. ;-)
--
Christian Recktenwald : :
citecs GmbH
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
On 8/20/2005 4:22 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
basically I will have a different sql userpref for [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED], or different global defaults for hosta.com. This seems
elementary to do, but I can't figure out how to ma
On 8/20/2005 4:22 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
> basically I will have a different sql userpref for [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], or different global defaults for hosta.com. This seems
> elementary to do, but I can't figure out how to make spamd tell which one
> to use --
Hey all,
I'd like to run one spamd box for many clients, using SQL user prefs. Is
there a way to have spamd use different domain names -- or have spamc pass
the `hostname' of the machine along?
basically I will have a different sql userpref for [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED], or dif
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sander Holthaus - Orange XL writes:
> Steve Martin wrote:
> > Sat Aug 20 00:28:36 2005 [16014] info: spamd: processing
> > message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for filter:88
> > Sat Aug 20 00:28:42 2005 [16014] error: __alarm__ Sat Aug 20
> > 00:28:42 2005 [16
Steve Martin wrote:
> Sat Aug 20 00:28:36 2005 [16014] info: spamd: processing
> message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for filter:88
> Sat Aug 20 00:28:42 2005 [16014] error: __alarm__ Sat Aug 20
> 00:28:42 2005 [16014] error: __alarm__ Sat Aug 20 00:28:49
> 2005 [16014] info: spamd: identified spam
> (35.1/
> -Original Message-
> From: Loren Wilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 10:26 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: spurious __alarm__ messages in spamd log
>
> I suspect __alarm__ is the result of a unix alarm() function
> that is used to se
I suspect __alarm__ is the result of a unix alarm() function that is used to
set a timeout.
Probably has set a timeout for some function, and then succeeded in the
function before the timeout and forgotten to clear the timeout. It then
hits some other poor unsuspecting function.
Alternately AS m
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
Anyone know how one might track these down (what debug areas
to start with)? I've seen 2 in the last 30 hours or so.
Rerunning the same message through with spamc gives the same
score, but no __alarm__ messages.
SA 3.1rc1
I started to debug thi
Interesting. The last case of it my log the mail was flagged with
both DCC and Pyzor so the "alarm" must not have been fatal if it was
in those modules.
I'll poke around a little more myself.
On Aug 20, 2005, at 9:14 AM, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Steve Mar
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 12:43 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: spurious __alarm__ messages in spamd log
>
> Sat Aug 20 00:28:36 2005 [16014] info: spamd: processing
> message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hallo und Guten Tag Justin,
Heute (am 20.08.2005 - 04:50 Uhr)
schriebst Du:
> unfortunately, there's no sign of a pyzor process starting there.
> a search for "pyzor" finds nothing.
yeah, sorry. But I have logged a long time and this was not. :(
Another possibility?
--
Viele Grüße, Kind r
You need to setup your trusted networks properly. Visit the wiki in this
regard. Look for trusted_networks and internal_networks.
I had to set mine something like...
trusted_networks 192.168/16 127/8 207.217.121/24
internal_networks 192.168/16
207.217.121/24 is the address for the Earthlink pop3
This is weird.. I don't know if it has something to do with the problem but
since Aug 12, I don't see any SURBL hits on maillog anymore...
Has anythiung changed?
Here is my SURBL ruleset, Im just updated to Mail::SpamAssassin 3.0.4
[EMAIL PROTECTED] spamassassin]# cat 25_uribl.cf
# SpamAssassin
Im not using Bayes, how do I enable that and/or use sa-learn?
|-Original Message-
|From: Matthew Yette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Sent: Viernes, 19 de Agosto de 2005 03:46 p.m.
|To: Anton Krall; Matthias Fuhrmann; users@spamassassin.apache.org
|Subject: RE: Sudden Increase in Spam Mails
20 matches
Mail list logo
