Robert Menschel wrote:
Just quick notice that the SARE OBFU rules (70_sare_obfu*.cf) have
been updated.
Can someone mention whats the difference between:
http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_whitelist.cf
and
http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_whitelist_rcvd.cf
Cami
From: Cami [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Robert Menschel wrote:
Just quick notice that the SARE OBFU rules (70_sare_obfu*.cf) have
been updated.
Can someone mention whats the difference between:
http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_whitelist.cf
and
Hi
i have SA3.0 on FC3 with spam delivered to $HOME/mail/spam
quota's enabled for /home where users live /var where users mail lives.
problem is the ownership is $uid.$gid of said user which means it eats into
the quota of the user if they don't read and delete the spam.
normal mail is
Robert Menschel wrote:
Just quick notice that the SARE OBFU rules (70_sare_obfu*.cf) have
been updated.
Can someone mention whats the difference between:
http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_whitelist.cf
and
http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_whitelist_rcvd.cf
Loren Wilton wrote:
Robert Menschel wrote:
Just quick notice that the SARE OBFU rules (70_sare_obfu*.cf) have
been updated.
Can someone mention whats the difference between:
http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_whitelist.cf
and
Whitelist appears to be a newer file regardless of what the headers
say. It includes more sites in its whitelist. It appears whitelist_rcvd
is obsolete. It's not mentioned on the SARE Rules page.
These were announced on the list about a week ago.
Whitelist_from_rcvd.cf
is NEW file.
From: Loren Wilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Robert Menschel wrote:
Just quick notice that the SARE OBFU rules (70_sare_obfu*.cf) have
been updated.
Can someone mention whats the difference between:
http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_whitelist.cf
and
On Freitag, 30. September 2005 23:36 mouss wrote:
I have an IMAP folder with 1500 spams. I convert it to a mbox format
why?
sa-learn --spam $dir
works
sa-learn does not report to the online databases dcc/pyzor/razor.
If you refer to sa-learn against IMAP: How to do it with cyrus? How to
Hi,
first I want to thank you for keeping up all the good work and
updating the rule files. Unfortunately, some of the PGP signatures
don't seem to match their rule files (i.e. 70_sare_genlsubj.cf.sig,
70_sare_header.cf.sig), and Matt's Key 0x1129F0D3 used for signing
evilnumbers.cf has expired.
On Saturday 01 October 2005 11:34 pm, JamesDR wrote:
Chris wrote:
On Saturday 01 October 2005 09:34 pm, JamesDR wrote:
Chris wrote:
I may have missed a thread on this but is there a reason that SA is
now placing its tags above the headers:
X-Spam-Virus: No
X-Spam-Seen: Tokens 251
I'm seeing this spamd error now in my syslog and I haven't a clue as to what
it means. Could someone possibly assist?
Oct 2 13:08:47 cpollock spamd[28098]: prefork: child states: BI
Oct 2 13:08:48 cpollock spamd[28098]: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid
30717 due to SIGCHLD
Oct 2
Chris wrote:
[snip]
Something is very odd then, I have the domainkeys plugin commented out.
Tags in ham are placed above the header info while tags for spam are placed
in the usual place. One other question, what/where is the --max-clients
setting? I've observed an error telling me it
Chris wrote:
Something is very odd then, I have the domainkeys plugin commented out.
Whether or not you're using the DomainKeys plugin makes no difference
regarding header placement.
Tags in ham are placed above the header info while tags for spam are placed
in the usual place.
It'll
Chris wrote:
I'm seeing this spamd error now in my syslog and I haven't a clue as to what
it means. Could someone possibly assist?
Oct 2 13:08:47 cpollock spamd[28098]: prefork: child states: BI
Oct 2 13:08:48 cpollock spamd[28098]: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid
30717 due to SIGCHLD
On Sunday 02 October 2005 04:30 pm, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Chris wrote:
Oct 2 13:08:48 cpollock spamd[28098]: prefork: select returned error
on server filehandle:
Oct 2 13:08:48 cpollock spamd[28098]: spamd: server successfully
spawned child process, pid 712
Oct 2 13:08:48
Hello Ralph,
Sunday, October 2, 2005, 5:37:59 AM, you wrote:
RS first I want to thank you for keeping up all the good work and
RS updating the rule files. Unfortunately, some of the PGP signatures
RS don't seem to match their rule files (i.e. 70_sare_genlsubj.cf.sig,
RS 70_sare_header.cf.sig),
16 matches
Mail list logo