Hi,
these headers trigger the FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK check on 2.64 and 3.1.0:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13)
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,
FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=no version=3.1.0
Received: from
Hi
Got a box that is pretty quite only getting through a few hundred mail
per day - I would say on average i get about 2 or 3 of these errors each
day. Is there a way to make the bayes aspect of SA more efficient?
thanks
Jan 27 14:28:50 amavis[4833]: (04833-08) SA TIMED OUT, backtrace:
Got a box that is pretty quite only getting through a few hundred mail
per day - I would say on average i get about 2 or 3 of these errors each
day. Is there a way to make the bayes aspect of SA more efficient?
Run a force-expire manually from a cron job and turn off auto expire.
Tom,
From Loren Wilton:
Run a force-expire manually from a cron job and turn off auto expire.
... or switch bayes db to SQL, where auto-expire is much faster
and is no longer an issue.
Mark
For the last few days, I've been receiving stock spam, same format as the other stock spam, except the spam is a gif image. Some randomstringofletters.gif, and a bunch of text. The random text will show up at the bottom of the page. The ones I'm currently seeing are for Golden Apple Oil and Gas.
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Joe Zitnik wrote:
For the last few days, I've been receiving stock spam, same format as
the other stock spam, except the spam is a gif image. Some
randomstringofletters.gif, and a bunch of text. The random text will
show up at the bottom of the page. The ones I'm
... or switch bayes db to SQL, where auto-expire is much faster
and is no longer an issue.
i would prefer to go this route if possible - are there any good
how-to's that deal with making this switch?
thanks
And mine, note that these are *post* MailScanner and RBLs, which are
running on my mail gateways. By the time SA gets the mail I've pruned
anywhere from 45% to 75% of the messages, depending on the day.
TOP SPAM RULES FIRED
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM %OFHAM
Tom Brown wrote:
... or switch bayes db to SQL, where auto-expire is much faster
and is no longer an issue.
i would prefer to go this route if possible - are there any good
how-to's that deal with making this switch?
http://people.apache.org/~parker/presentations/
Michael
TOP SPAM RULES FIRED
RULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM %OFHAM
RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 38578 5.50 56.87 87.970.71
RAZOR2_CHECK37597 5.36 55.43 85.731.10
RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 34487 4.92 50.84
How are you guys obtaining these stats?
Thanks,
Clay
On 1/31/2006 at 8:53:01 am, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Bowie
Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
TOP SPAM RULES FIRED
RULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM
%OFHAM
RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 38578 5.50
Hi all ,
I still consider myself a newbie in the SA world, so bear with me if this
seems like an ignorant question;
Here's a little background on the setup, Freebsd 5.4 Exim and SA
I use this box simply to filter the mail and hand it off to my mailserver
(no local users/accounts/boxes)
I
Run a force-expire manually from a cron job and turn off auto expire.
Alternately, change the Amvis timeout for SA.
... or switch bayes db to SQL, where auto-expire is much faster
and is no longer an issue.
i would prefer to go this route if possible - are there any good how-to's
that
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 06:59:11AM -0800, Bret Miller wrote:
How much diskspace do you need for your database and how many
users do you have?
I expect that depends on the SQL Database you're running and how you
have SA configured.
True...
Using Microsoft MSDE 2000 database, ~300 users,
Title: RE: Pump and Dump SARE rules
-Original Message-
From: Doc Schneider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 5:14 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Pump and Dump SARE rules
http://rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_stocks.cf
Is the
Clay Davis wrote:
How are you guys obtaining these stats?
sa-stats.pl, there is more than one version. I got mine from the Sare
Ninjas as I use daemon tools to run spamd. I don't know where the other
one can be found or what the difference is.
Google, or use these list archives for more
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
Hi all ,
I still consider myself a newbie in the SA world, so bear with me if this
seems like an ignorant question;
Here's a little background on the setup, Freebsd 5.4 Exim and SA
I use this box simply to filter the mail and hand it off to my mailserver
(no
Hello,
I've been having problems with drug messages with subjects such as:
Re: infrangible Phharam aceutical
Re: dud Phharam aceutical
Re: tympanum Phharamaceutica l
Re: paraph Phharamaceu tical
Re: investigator Ph haramacy
The body of the message looks weird in Outlook, the drugs are
http://www.rulesemporium.com/programs/sa-stats.txt
Phil Randal
Network Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK
-Original Message-
From: DAve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 31 January 2006 15:39
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Post your top 10 from
How to flush the database?
But I don't see how they can cause the problem - why they scan the
email in a few seconds, then jump up into the regions of 300 seconds?
A Bayes DB expire can take up to 10 minutes to complete, depending on
your system and how big your bayes DB is.
However, this
This is after greylisting and sbl-xbl checks:
TOP SPAM RULES FIRED
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM
%OFHAM
1HTML_MESSAGE
Kristopher Austin wrote:
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM
%OFHAM
1HTML_MESSAGE 45870 5.13 27.72 70.37
55.36
Wait... so 27% of all mail is HTML, 70% of spam is
sa-stats.pl, there is more than one version. I got mine from the Sare
Ninjas as I use daemon tools to run spamd. I don't know where the other
one can be found or what the difference is.
Google, or use these list archives for more info.
I've had one off-list request for this so far, so I'll
Hmm, I guess that's a question for Dallas. This is the version I'm
using:
# file: sa-stats.pl
# date: 2005-08-03
# version: 1.0
# author: Dallas Engelken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# desc: SA 3.1.x log parser
I don't seem to be the only one showing that strange math. Dave had the
same sort of entry in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kristopher Austin wrote:
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM
%OFHAM
1HTML_MESSAGE 45870 5.13 27.72 70.37
55.36
Wait... so 27% of all mail is
Kristopher Austin wrote:
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM
%OFHAM
1HTML_MESSAGE 45870 5.13 27.72 70.37
55.36
Wait... so 27% of all mail is HTML, 70% of spam is HTML,
Hi all,
I'm running a very unique implementation of spamassassin... I have qmail,
with _no_ home user directories (at least defined by a traditional
/etc/passwd entry). All my user dirs come from an SQL db, and qmail is run
by a separate 'master' user (in my case qmail). I am using ifspamh
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 11:20 -0600, Kristopher Austin wrote:
Hmm, I guess that's a question for Dallas. This is the version I'm
using:
# file: sa-stats.pl
# date: 2005-08-03
# version: 1.0
# author: Dallas Engelken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# desc: SA 3.1.x log parser
I don't seem to be the only
Hello,
I have spamd setup and its working perfectly except for processing custom
subject rules in user_prefs files. The subject rules for the default rule
set are processed and applied as expected all the time. I have copied and
renamed subject rules to user_prefs files and tested them. I wrote a
On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 16:45 -0600, wrote:
Here is mine:
TOP SPAM RULES FIRED
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM
%OFHAM
1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I have spamd setup and its working perfectly except for processing custom
subject rules in user_prefs files. The subject rules for the default rule
set are processed and applied as expected all the time.
Rules are by default not allowed in user_prefs files
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 07:37 -0600, DAve wrote:
And mine, note that these are *post* MailScanner and RBLs, which are
running on my mail gateways. By the time SA gets the mail I've pruned
anywhere from 45% to 75% of the messages, depending on the day.
TOP SPAM RULES FIRED
RANK RULE NAME
Hello Gary,
Just a quick reply - I looked in /var/log/mail.log and spotted the
following line that came up loads in the log file:
Jan 31 17:48:12 destiny spamd[15602]: prefork: syswrite(6) failed,
retrying... at /usr/share/perl5/Mail/SpamAssassin/SpamdForkScaling.pm line
554.
This might be my
Hello Gary,
Just a quick reply - I looked in /var/log/mail.log and spotted the
following line that came up loads in the log file:
Jan 31 17:48:12 destiny spamd[15602]: prefork: syswrite(6) failed,
retrying... at /usr/share/perl5/Mail/SpamAssassin/SpamdForkScaling.pm line
554.
This might be my
Mike Jackson wrote:
Matthew van Eerde wrote:
Kristopher Austin wrote:
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL
%OFSPAM %OFHAM
1
HTML_MESSAGE 45870 5.13 27.72 70.37
55.36
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL
%OFSPAM %OFHAM
1
HTML_MESSAGE 45870 5.13 27.72 70.37
55.36
Wait... so 27% of all mail is HTML, 70% of spam is HTML, and 55% of
ham is HTML?
-Original Message-
From: Dallas Engelken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 12:42 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Post your top 10 from sa-stats
The %OFMAIL category is misleading because its comparing the hit count
(on that line) against
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kristopher Austin wrote:
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM
%OFHAM
1HTML_MESSAGE 45870 5.13 27.72 70.37
55.36
Wait... so 27% of all mail is
No bug.
Percent of all mail is indeed, percent of all mail.
Percent of all spam is the number of spam messages that triggered this
rule divided by the total number of messages marked as spam. The percent
of ham is the number of ham messages that triggered this rule divided by
the total number
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Jackson wrote:
Matthew van Eerde wrote:
Kristopher Austin wrote:
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL
%OFSPAM %OFHAM
1
HTML_MESSAGE 45870 5.13 27.72
jdow wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kristopher Austin wrote:
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM
%OFHAM
1HTML_MESSAGE 45870 5.13 27.72 70.37
55.36
Wait... so
From: Dallas Engelken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 07:37 -0600, DAve wrote:
And mine, note that these are *post* MailScanner and RBLs, which are
running on my mail gateways. By the time SA gets the mail I've pruned
anywhere from 45% to 75% of the messages, depending on the day.
From: Mike Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL
%OFSPAM %OFHAM
1
HTML_MESSAGE 45870 5.13 27.72 70.37
55.36
Wait... so 27% of all mail is HTML, 70% of spam
jdow wrote:
From: Dallas Engelken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 07:37 -0600, DAve wrote:
And mine, note that these are *post* MailScanner and RBLs, which are
running on my mail gateways. By the time SA gets the mail I've pruned
anywhere from 45% to 75% of the messages, depending
TOP SPAM RULES FIRED
RANKRULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM %OFHAM
1BAYES_99 141 4.94 73.06 93.38
Tom,
... or switch bayes db to SQL, where auto-expire is much faster
and is no longer an issue.
i would prefer to go this route if possible - are there any good
how-to's that deal with making this switch?
Mail-SpamAssassin-3.1.0/sql/README*
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 4:45 PM
To: jdow
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Post your top 10 from sa-stats
jdow wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kristopher Austin wrote:
RANKRULE NAME
- Original Message -
From: mouss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: jdow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 2:01 PM
Subject: Re: hey john spam
jdow a écrit :
I'm watching them still roll in
seems they switched to News for john.
Interesting -
I am running spamassassin 3.1.0 on Debian Sarge and I just installed the
correct packages to get rid of missing .pm file errors from spamd.log
during SPF checking. Now I am seeing:
Wed Feb 1 12:20:12 2006 [9646] error: no response
in spamd.log for most messages. I believe that it is related
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 5:03 PM
To: jdow
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Post your top 10 from sa-stats
jdow wrote:
From: Dallas Engelken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 07:37
Re: infrangible Phharam aceutical
Re: dud Phharam aceutical
Re: tympanum Phharamaceutica l
Re: paraph Phharamaceu tical
Re: investigator Ph haramacy
Someone was proposing rules the other day for mis-spelled pharm stuff.
The body of the message looks weird in Outlook, the drugs are written
Hi.
I just joined the list, and I do a little peripheral work with
Mimedefang and
Thunderbird, sendmail, etc.
In working with MdF, the following issue came up.
(1) Is there a way to specify that you want to reset all previously defined
scores, like score * 0 for instance? The reason is
52 matches
Mail list logo
