> For the local.cf settings, my local.cf file seems pretty inocuous:
Depends on precisely what you mean by 'inocuous'. At least four of those
settings are invalid.
Loren
>
> #
> # rewrite_subject 0
> # report_safe 1
> # trusted_networks 212.17.35.
>
> # Bayesian Auto Learn
> auto_learn
Here's what --lint shows (the same errors you pointed out, thanks)
saskatoon:/etc/mail/spamassassin root# spamassassin --lint
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: auto_learn 1
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: safe_reporting 0
config: SpamAssassin failed to pars
Thanks,
First, I don't know that the DNS server is the problem. I have
caching DNS on the mailserver itself and it seems to work OK. I'm
wondering if Net::DNS isn't working properly? It wasn't installed by
default, so I used CPAN to get the latest version. How does a person
go about testi
> What does this line in the debug mean? I assume it is related to the
> lack of network tests...
>
> debug: plugin: Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL=HASH(0x19250d8)
> inhibited further callbacks
It is essentially meaningless and is a normal operating sign. I believe it
has been removed or ch
At 11:00 PM 12/23/2005, Miles Muri wrote:
I'm trying to work through a problem where network tests don't seem
to be working. Here's what I get from the debug on the command line:
BTW: SA 3.0.1 invoked through amavisd on Mac OS X Server 10.4.3
saskatoon:~ mmuri$ sa-learn --dump magic
ERROR:
Sorry about that... pressed send before I had finished writing the
message.
regarding the debug output from the previous message, I have a few
questions:
1) is the // in the default rules dir normal? Where do I fix this?
2) network tests don't seem to be working, I tried this test
mentio
I had a similar issue last week. I had inadvertantly set the DNS to an
internal DNS server with forwarders to the outside, rather than to a real
outside DNS server. Once I changed to a bona-fide outside DNS provider, all
my network tests worked properly.
You also need to fix those invalid se
I'm trying to work through a problem where network tests don't seem
to be working. Here's what I get from the debug on the command line:
BTW: SA 3.0.1 invoked through amavisd on Mac OS X Server 10.4.3
saskatoon:~ mmuri$ sa-learn --dump magic
ERROR: Bayes dump returned an error, please re-run
Hi Matt,
I resolved the issue. Thanks for pointing me in a different direction- the
rubber has not been meeting the road for about a week on this issue!
After upgrading using CPAN I am getting BAYES scores (among others from the
/usr/share/spamassassin dir). So apparently it was an installation is
Here is some debugging info from MailScanner.
Starting MailScanner...
In Debugging mode, not forking...
debug: SpamAssassin version 3.0.1
debug: Score set 0 chosen.
debug: running in taint mode? no
debug: config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: use_razor1 0
debug: SpamAssassin versio
Hi Matt,
I stopped running spamd.
The ALL_TRUSTED was letting a lot of junk get through and I saw a post that
recommended 0 for the score to prevent false negatives. I have restored it
to its original and added trusted networks (with a couple of subnets) as you
suggest.
I am still not seeing any
Loren,
You are seriously paying attention. I did the debugs yesterday and
completely rebuilt the bayes db today using a whitelist and a blacklist
mailspool so it is now a lot smaller since it lost a couple of years of
autolearning when I started over...
So it is actually from a site bayes database
This seems strange:
> Here is sa-learn --dump magic:
> This shows that I have more than enough spam and ham
> 0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db version
> 0.000 0 3754 0 non-token data: nspam
> 0.000 0220 0 non-
> Does anyone have any suggestions, apart from simply reducing the score
> for SARE_URI_EQUALS? Is this a spamassassin bug, or is there no way to
> guarantee that only real uris are parsed as such?
Several.
1.Change your report generator to remove the extraneous dot between
updated and by. O
John Urness wrote:
>
> /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
> score ALL_TRUSTED 0 0 0 0
That is very concerning. Why'd you do that? 99.9% of the time the proper fix is
to declare a trusted_networks. Disabling this rule merely covers up one symptom
of a very pervasive problem (errant trust).
>
>
Hello Chris,
Friday, December 23, 2005, 3:04:29 AM, you wrote:
CL> I'm getting false positives for SARE_URI_EQUALS, which scores 5 and is
CL> therefore skewing the scoring of some mail quite badly. ...
CL> Does anyone have any suggestions, apart from simply reducing the
CL> score for SARE_URI_EQ
Hi,
I recently upgraded from spamassassin 3.0 to 3.1 and right away the amount
of false negatives increased. I thought at first that it was because of the
loss of dcc and razor (which surely is a factor), but on further
investigation it appears that it is more related to the Bayes system.
I have l
François Conil said:
snip
>
> it's kinda easy with postfix :
> http://www-personal.umich.edu/~malth/gaptuning/postfix/
>
> I strongly advise to run it manually instead of via cron, since if the
> exchange server sh*t itself, the exchange_recipients list will contains
> nothing and all mails will b
CORRECTION OF MY PREVIOUS STATEMENTS:
SBL doesn't appear to use a bitmask format as I suggested earlier. 127.0.0.6
would appear to be a valid answer for XBL only. It looks like they might use
format 2 below, and SA's query implementation reflects this. Their choice of
listing numbers suggests 1),
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin Hepworth wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Craig McLean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: 23 December 2005 16:03
>> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
> -Original Message-
> From: Craig McLean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 23 December 2005 16:03
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Kai Schaetzl wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> You are all speculating. No one knows why or if the original poster can't
> unsubscribe.
I'll agree with that, to a point.
> And, frankly, it was the first posting of this kind I've ever
> seen. It's not a problem at all.
>
updated.by - check http://www.tld.by/cgi-bin/registry.cgi
You'll see that update.by is a registered domain! Therefore
"updated.by" is indeed a URI. QED
Paul Shupak
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* jdow wrote (23/12/05 12:06):
> From: "Chris Lear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>* jdow wrote (23/12/05 11:26):
>>> From: "Chris Lear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
I'm getting false positives for SARE_URI_EQUALS, which scores 5 and is
therefore skewing the scoring of some mail quite badly.
The
From: "Chris Lear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* jdow wrote (23/12/05 11:26):
From: "Chris Lear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm getting false positives for SARE_URI_EQUALS, which scores 5 and is
therefore skewing the scoring of some mail quite badly.
The weird thing is that the uris that spamassassin is comp
* jdow wrote (23/12/05 11:26):
> From: "Chris Lear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> I'm getting false positives for SARE_URI_EQUALS, which scores 5 and is
>> therefore skewing the scoring of some mail quite badly.
>> The weird thing is that the uris that spamassassin is complaining about
>> aren't uris a
On Friday 23 December 2005 06:29, jdow wrote:
>From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Greetings all;
>>
>> Because FC2 seems to have fallen off the Fedora-Legacy radar, I
>> dl'd the perl5.8.5 stuff for FC3, figuring if there was a
>> dependency clash, rpm would fuss.
>>
>> It didn't, but I'
From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Greetings all;
Because FC2 seems to have fallen off the Fedora-Legacy radar, I dl'd
the perl5.8.5 stuff for FC3, figuring if there was a dependency clash,
rpm would fuss.
It didn't, but I'm noting that when SA is searching for missing pkgs,
the log
From: "Chris Lear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm getting false positives for SARE_URI_EQUALS, which scores 5 and is
therefore skewing the scoring of some mail quite badly.
The weird thing is that the uris that spamassassin is complaining about
aren't uris at all. The mail in question is auto-created r
Greetings all;
Because FC2 seems to have fallen off the Fedora-Legacy radar, I dl'd
the perl5.8.5 stuff for FC3, figuring if there was a dependency clash,
rpm would fuss.
It didn't, but I'm noting that when SA is searching for missing pkgs,
the log does not indicate that it is searching in the
I'm getting false positives for SARE_URI_EQUALS, which scores 5 and is
therefore skewing the scoring of some mail quite badly.
The weird thing is that the uris that spamassassin is complaining about
aren't uris at all. The mail in question is auto-created reports of cvs
diffs, so it's slightly unus
You are all speculating. No one knows why or if the original poster can't
unsubscribe. And, frankly, it was the first posting of this kind I've ever
seen. It's not a problem at all.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Aaron Boyles wrote on Thu, 22 Dec 2005 09:34:09 -0500:
> Unfortunately, this would result in a third "step" in the SMTP process.
> Currently, the SMTP filter I run allows us to use our choice of virus
> scanner to check for viruses, monitor real-time traffic, and even "chat
> back" to a would-b
Yes. Do it with due consideration. (I raised Bayes_99 to 5.0, for
example. At this location that is as sure an indication of spam as
I have present on the system. A score lower than Bayes_90, as out
of the box, seemed stupid. Bayes_99 fires on 0.08% of ham and 84.7%
of spam. Whitelist rules handle
34 matches
Mail list logo
