At 04:22 PM 10/19/2005, Jerome Mainka wrote:
But if I remove mwinf0107.wanadoo.fr from the trusted networks set, I have
the
same behavior. Actually, if I empty the internal/trusted networks set, I get
the same behavior.
Warning: you can never empty the trusted networks set. If you don't have
Jerome Mainka wrote:
The sender and the recipient belong together to the same provider, and the
final server of the received path is not the host on which SA is run.
Which server is scanning the mail?
You'll have a better chance of getting a solution if you attach the
*complete* headers, incl
Hello,
I've been getting this warning since up to SA 3.1.0 on FreeBSD
4.8-RELEASE-p22
Argument "0.53_01" isn't numeric in numeric lt (<)
at/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.7/Mail/SpamAssassin/Dns.pm line 588.
This may check version of Dns.pm. The file Dns.pm has no version
number itself. Coul
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >Where should I start looking? Has anyone encountered/fixed this yet?
> >
> >
>
>Which storage engine are you using?
>
>Michael
>
>
>
>Here's my config:
>
>
>bayes_store_module Mail::SpamAssassin::BayesStore::PgSQL
>
>
Possib
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:>Where should I start looking? Has anyone encountered/fixed this yet?>>Which storage engine are you using?Michael Here's my config:bayes_store_module Mail::SpamAssassin::BayesStore::PgSQLbayes_sql_dsn DBI:Pg:dbname=;host=bayes_sql_username
Is it because Razor *and* Spamassassin are getting executed in my
procmailrc? I like to have them separated so that I see what each of
them are filtering. Or would it be something else?
:0 Wc
| razor-check
:0 Wa
/var/mail/razor
:0fw: spamassassin.lock
* < 256000
| spamassassin
:0:
* ^X-Spam-
BDY.RTF
Description: RTF file
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Where should I start looking? Has anyone encountered/fixed this yet?
>
>
Which storage engine are you using?
Michael
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Le Mercredi 19 Octobre 2005 22:40, jdow a écrit :
> << Do not send directly. Send through your ISP's mail service. That is
> << about the only way to avoid the dialup problem you are having. You ARE
> << on a dialup address. So you get tagged that way when you try to send
> << email directly.
I do
From: "Jerome Mainka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Le Mercredi 19 Octobre 2005 21:13, Matt Kettler a écrit :
Jerome Mainka wrote:
> OK, I understand that. But the why is it offending to send a mail from a
> dynamic address?
It's not, it's only offensive to send it from a dynamic IP directly to a
trusted
When RBL checks are on, and an X-Originating-IP header is found, it does
an IP check using my_inet_aton. However, there seems to be a problem
with certain types of headers. I've seen this style of header (I think
coming from a Mailman list)
X-Originating-IP: 192.168.0.25/instID=29
The part
Jeferson Pessoa Santana wrote:
Hi People,
I'm having some problems with the SpamAssassin Rules. I have to e-mails
server (Enchange and Exim) and another server with SpamAssassin and Exim
to delivery the messages. In my DNS server, I'd put the mx(10) poiting
to the SPamAssassin server and it'
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmmm... is it possible that you're running the email through SpamAssassin,
attaching the report, and then running it through SpamAssassin again?
I agree, this is very likely what you are doing.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Greetings All,
I've just moved my Bayes database to
postgres. Works, except some inserts cause postgres to throw the
following error:
ERROR: syntax error at or near "" at character
ERROR: current transaction is aborted,
commands ignored until end of transaction block
It would seem that it's a
Le Mercredi 19 Octobre 2005 21:13, Matt Kettler a écrit :
> Jerome Mainka wrote:
> > OK, I understand that. But the why is it offending to send a mail from a
> > dynamic address?
>
> It's not, it's only offensive to send it from a dynamic IP directly to a
> trusted server.
OK. (Sorry if I am a litt
Matt Rossiter wrote:
> I´m probably missing something really easy here. I seem to get quite
> a bit of spams with spamassassin.txt attached, and it contains
> something like the following:
>
>
...
> 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/)
> 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_1
I´m probably missing something really easy here. I seem to
get quite a bit of spams with spamassassin.txt attached, and it contains something
like the following:
Content analysis details: (9.5 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
-
Jerome Mainka wrote:
> Le Mercredi 19 Octobre 2005 16:56, Pierre Thomson a écrit :
>
>>>The first hop is supposed to be ignored and the last 2 are all trusted.
>
>
>>The originating IP 193.251.71.180 is indeed listed in both NJABL and SORBS
>>dynamic address databases.
>
>
> OK, I understand t
Jon Kvebaek wrote:
> Hi,
> we are currently receiving a lot of mail like the one listed beneath. No
> rules seem to hit it at all, and it gets a low negative score. Does
> anyone have any ideas on how to deal with this (except that I could
> make some rules punishing the occurence of wristwatches o
FH wrote:
> I have a script that goes through and looks for ham mailboxes every 6
> hours[1], I also recently added the below to my local.cf file:
>
> use_auto_whitelist 1
> auto_whitelist_path /etc/mail/spamassassin/auto-whitelist
>
> and primed the auto-whitelist w/
>
> spamassassin --add-add
Mark London wrote:
> Hi - spamassassin is running on psfcsv1.psfc.mit.edu (has been for
> several years, with same configuration)/
Ok, does psfcsv1.psfc.mit.edu resolve psfcsv1.psfc.mit.edu to a reserved IP?
>I don't use trusted_networks.
Ok, so you use the auto-guessed trusted_networks list.
Bob McClure Jr wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 10:52:40AM -0500, Liam-PrintingAutomation wrote:
Thanks all who replied. Karl P. helped me out with pointing out that
procmailrc needed to be in /etc/ and more importantly, because I'm not
finding this piece of info on the Web site an
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 10:52:40AM -0500, Liam-PrintingAutomation wrote:
> Menno van Bennekom wrote:
>
> >>>Well you need to call spamassassin (or spamc, that's a better option)
> >>>somehow. You'll need amavis, mail-scanner, procmail or some other
> >>>method of calling SA.
> >>>
> >>>Can't be m
Menno van Bennekom wrote:
Well you need to call spamassassin (or spamc, that's a better option)
somehow. You'll need amavis, mail-scanner, procmail or some other
method of calling SA.
Can't be much more help than that I'm afraid as I don't run sendmail.
Ah, OK. I'll look into those thi
- Original Message -
From: "Liam-PrintingAutomation,Inc." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: Help with install and config
> Rick Macdougall wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Well you need to call spamassassin (or spamc, that's a better option)
> >
Le Mercredi 19 Octobre 2005 16:56, Pierre Thomson a écrit :
> > The first hop is supposed to be ignored and the last 2 are all trusted.
> The originating IP 193.251.71.180 is indeed listed in both NJABL and SORBS
> dynamic address databases.
OK, I understand that. But the why is it offending to s
Hello.
From: Rodney Richison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: auto-create blacklist
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:57:14 -0500
> was thinking more along the lines of by ip address.
> I see though, this might require a way for the user to whitelist himself
> via a html page.
Umm... also I don't think
> The first hop is supposed to be ignored
I don't think so. The first hop is the most significant one; usually it's the
only one that shows the origin of the email. A lot of the spam I receive has
only one hop, and SpamAssassin definitely checks it!
The originating IP 193.251.71.180 is indeed
Hello,
I am very confused about the way SpamAssassin triggers these rules. Here is
the Received headers of a legitimate message:
=== Received headers
Received: from mwinf0107.wanadoo.fr (mwinf0107.wanadoo.fr)
by mwinb0504 (SMTP Server) with LMTP; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:49:36 +0200
Received:
was thinking more along the lines of by ip address.
I see though, this might require a way for the user to whitelist himself
via a html page.
cps-network (Martin Fernau) wrote:
I don't think that this is a good idea.
Example: A spammer use my mail-address as the sender-address (he can do thi
I have a script that goes through and looks for ham mailboxes every 6
hours[1], I also recently added the below to my local.cf file:
use_auto_whitelist 1
auto_whitelist_path /etc/mail/spamassassin/auto-whitelist
and primed the auto-whitelist w/
spamassassin --add-addr-to-whitelist= [according t
Parsing the first RECEIVED_FROM hop might work -- mail source -- rather
than the literal FROM: in the envelope.
--
ELLEN L. SLEETER
Network Services
OLIS
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
This email expresses the personal opinions of the author
and in no way represents the opinions
I don't think that this is a good idea.
Example: A spammer use my mail-address as the sender-address (he can do this)
and send spam to you. You identify this mail as spam with maybe a very high
score. So you blacklist my mailaddress and I can't send any mail to you
because a spammer just used m
Is there not a way to auto-create blacklists based on really high
scores, so the message can then be stoped by postfix at the mta level?
--
Highest Regards,
Rodney Richison
RCR Computing
http://www.rcrnet.net
118 N. Broadway
Cleveland, OK 74020
918-358-
>> Well you need to call spamassassin (or spamc, that's a better option)
>> somehow. You'll need amavis, mail-scanner, procmail or some other
>> method of calling SA.
>>
>> Can't be much more help than that I'm afraid as I don't run sendmail.
>
> Ah, OK. I'll look into those things and see what I
> Good afternoon, all,
> What follows my .sig is the verbatim text version of an html+text
> message. It's fun to see behind the curtain from time to time. :-)
> The HTML form started at "UNIVERSITY DIPLOMAS" and ended with
> "SUNDAYS & HOLIDAYS".
> I'm guessing the author put i
36 matches
Mail list logo
