Re: Over-scoring of SURBL lists...

On Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 7:00:33 PM, Matt Kettler wrote: > 2) diversity of criteria: > SURBL - all lists have nearly identical listing criteria, except ph. All but > PH > are "spotted in spam, doesn't appear to have legit use" and nothing more. JP, > AB, SC, WS and OB are all effectively t

Re: Spamassassin Spam Header

Also be careful with bayes_file_mode.. you want 7's here not 6's like you might think. This is really not a mode, but a mask, and it is sometimes used in directory creation. bayes_file_mode 0777 hello again, so i make a cronjob the spamassassin is learning the spams from the spam folder

[OT] Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 10:47:57PM -0500, Chris Santerre wrote: > Wow this exploded big :) Yeah after I sent it, I thought, "Was this a user > or the list?" > > Argh! SO bad. See not only is the NHL on break for Olympics, but MY mens > league got canceled until April because our ice rink caught f

RE: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Title: RE: DO NOT Filter this list!!! > -Original Message- > From: Daryl C. W. O'Shea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 3:37 PM > To: Chris Santerre > Cc: 'users@spamassassin.apache.org' > Subject: Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!! > > > Chris Santerre wr

Re: Over-scoring of SURBL lists...

Bill Landry wrote: >>> >>> So, Matt, why is this any different than an IP addresses that gets >>> listed in many different RBLs and reported by SA? >> >> Read the middle of my message, I already pointed that out as being >> different. > > I read the middle of your message, still don't see the dif

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

David B Funk wrote: > On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Bill Landry wrote: > >> If you cannot prevent the message from being fed to SA via your MTA, you >> could use something like this in SA: >> >> whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] apache.org # >> SpamAssassin List >> >> And if you are using bay

Re: Over-scoring of SURBL lists...

- Original Message - From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bill Landry wrote: Original Message - From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This makes me wonder if SA wouldn't be better off having some kind of meta rules that simply count how many URIBLs the message is list

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Bill Landry wrote: > If you cannot prevent the message from being fed to SA via your MTA, you > could use something like this in SA: > > whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] apache.org # > SpamAssassin List > > And if you are using bayes, you might also want to incl

Re: Over-scoring of SURBL lists...

Bill Landry wrote: > Original Message - From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> This makes me wonder if SA wouldn't be better off having some kind of >> meta rules >> that simply count how many URIBLs the message is listed in, or at >> least some >> kind of score-limiting feedback o

Re: Over-scoring of SURBL lists...

Original Message - From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This makes me wonder if SA wouldn't be better off having some kind of meta rules that simply count how many URIBLs the message is listed in, or at least some kind of score-limiting feedback on multiple hits. This would allow

Re: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

Pikers. I run 47 sets of rules. I should probably get rid of evilnumbers, though. It may be overkill at this time. (Or rather underkill?) {^_^} - Original Message - From: "" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> LMAO Sheesh! Here is what I have: SARE_SPAMCOP_TOP200 SARE_STOCKS EVILNUMBERS S

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

jdow wrote: If i cant whats the best way to prevent the list from being filtered ? With procmail: :0 * < 25 * !^List-Id: .*(spamassassin\.apache.\org) | /usr/bin/spamc -t 150 -c $USER Good way for spammers to get by your filters. :)

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Chris Santerre wrote: Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. Expect to see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or unsubscribe. - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - (reason: 552

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

From: "Ben Whyte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Chris Santerre wrote: Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. Expect to see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or unsubscribe. - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - (reason: 552

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

From: "Evan Platt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Wed, February 15, 2006 12:35 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (must fight back evil ideas of sending a GTUBE to the list...) IIRC, the list runs spamassassin and would block your message before it would make it to the list members. This is a matter of

Re: new type of spam

These were posted on the SARE-USERS list by Warren Sallade.  They should help you catch some of this.rawbody   __EWG_BAD34   />\s{0,3}V\s{0,3}rawbody   __EWG_BAD35   />\s{0,3}I\s{0,3}rawbody   __EWG_BAD36   />\s{0,3}A\s{0,3}rawbody   __EWG_BAD37   />\s{0,3}G\s{0,3}rawbody   __EWG_BAD38   />\s{0,3}R

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Bob Amen a écrit : > >Yup, can't filter on the From header but here is what I use, which I > got from the list some time ago: > > header WHITELIST_SAList-Id =~ > /(?:dev|users)\.spamassassin\.apache\.org/i > describe WHITELIST_SA SA List > score WHITELIST_SA

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Philip Prindeville wrote: Chris Santerre wrote: Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. Expect to see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or unsubscribe. - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - (reason: 552 spam score (1

Re: OT: what greylisting system do you use?

Andrew Donkin a écrit : > Ladies and gents, I'm about to start some gentle investigations into > greylisting, but I need some advice on which policy server to use. > It's off topic, so if you choose to reply privately I'll summarise. > > I'm asking here because I think you're closer to the leading

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

mouss wrote: > Matt Kettler a écrit : >> Philip Prindeville wrote: >> >> >>> Well, I could whitelist the list sender, but the MAIL FROM: includes a >>> monotonically increasing integer... so it's never the same string twice. >>> >>> That's sort of shoots us in the foot, doesn't it? ;-) >> >> Not

Over-scoring of SURBL lists...

All this hubub about not filtering the list has made me come to a realization. The SURBL URIBLs are collectively massively over-scored in SA 3.1.0. The problem lies in the SURBL lists, over time, become largely redundant with one another. A URI may be first listed by one or another of the SURBL l

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Matt Kettler a écrit : > Philip Prindeville wrote: > > >>Well, I could whitelist the list sender, but the MAIL FROM: includes a >>monotonically increasing integer... so it's never the same string twice. >> >>That's sort of shoots us in the foot, doesn't it? ;-) > > > Not really: > > whitelis

Re: new type of spam

Payal Rathod a écrit : > > How can I deal with these. I have SA 2.61 and bayes is not helping at > all with headers like, > 0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 50 to 56% [score: 0.5560] > > Can someone suggest a solution for this? > With warm regards, > -Payal > > from the header

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Philip Prindeville wrote: > > Well, I could whitelist the list sender, but the MAIL FROM: includes a > monotonically increasing integer... so it's never the same string twice. > > That's sort of shoots us in the foot, doesn't it? ;-) Not really: whitelist_from_spf [EMAIL PROTECTED] bayes_ig

Re: bayes question (sa-learn)

Philipp Snizek wrote: [...] However, I fear SA learns that headers coming from my internal MTA could be spam and so causing false results on real spam. Exactly. Forwarding e-mail breaks the original information and has to be avoided. What experiences have you made or how have you solved thi

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Chris Santerre wrote: Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. Expect to see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or unsubscribe. - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - (reason: 552 spam score (11.4) exceeded threshold)

OT: What's between postfix and SA?

Hi, I'd also like to discuss about what to use between postfix and SA. Currently I use amavisd-new, but just because I was used to it from previous versions. As I find it a bit hard to configure, I guess there should be nicer/easier/greater/funnier software to replace it. Anybody got some ideas

Re: OT: what greylisting system do you use?

I'd suggest postgrey, here the latest announcement: http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/postgrey/msg00960.html It's running stable since years for me, and there's very good support onthe (low volume) mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  I have had very good luck with Postfix & GLD(http://www.gasmi.net/gld.html). 

Re: OT: what greylisting system do you use?

On Mittwoch, 15. Februar 2006 22:02 Andrew Donkin wrote: >  Policy daemon, http://policyd.sourceforge.net/download.html >  SQLgrey, http://sqlgrey.sourceforge.net/ Maybe nothing for you, but I'd like to mention it for others who want to use greylisting in postfix without needing a database (i.e.

Some mail seems to get stuck

I get a number of these every day. All from 63.86.185.xx. They seem to hang sendmail for a long time. If I do a 'ps ax' these things are sleeping '22298 ?S 0:00 sendmail: k1FL11sL022298 mm.highercashflownetworknow.info [63.86.185.88]: DATA' and sometimes sit around for 20 to 30 minu

Re: new type of spam

On 2/15/2006 6:39 PM +0100, Payal Rathod wrote: Hi, I am getting a lot of new spam since yesterday with subject "Re: news". The body of the mail contains junk like, [snip] Can someone suggest a solution for this? With warm regards, -Payal Upgrading SA would help a lot! Regards, Niek

RE: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Ben Whyte wrote: > Bowie Bailey wrote: > > Ben Whyte wrote: > > > > > newbie question here but it applies to this, can I white list > > > based on the list headers, or can it only be on the standard from > > > to rcvd headers ? > > > > > > If i cant whats the best way to prevent the list from be

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Ben Whyte wrote: I am fortunate in that I run my own cohosted mail server, running exim which passes the messages through spamassassin and clamav before delivering. So I need to see how I can prevent exim from handing off the mail to spamassassin where possible ? If you're running it via t

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

- Original Message - From: "Ben Whyte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Chris Santerre wrote: Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. Expect to see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or unsubscribe. - The following addresses had permanent fatal e

Re: Errors building 3.1.0

On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 09:25:50AM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote: > Is this a known issue? Yep. http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4090 I included a patch in the ticket that I use to fix the spec file so that the build will work. The short version is that the libspamc.so fi

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Bowie Bailey wrote: Ben Whyte wrote: newbie question here but it applies to this, can I white list based on the list headers, or can it only be on the standard from to rcvd headers ? If i cant whats the best way to prevent the list from being filtered ? SpamAssassin has no capabilit

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Matt Kettler wrote: >> Unfortunately, that's not likely to change, as there's more than just >> this list hosted on the apache list server. The other lists benefit >> greatly from the filter. > > There's no way to bypass spam-checking based on the envelope-recipient? >

OT: what greylisting system do you use?

Ladies and gents, I'm about to start some gentle investigations into greylisting, but I need some advice on which policy server to use. It's off topic, so if you choose to reply privately I'll summarise. I'm asking here because I think you're closer to the leading edge of spam control than the po

RE: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Ben Whyte wrote: > newbie question here but it applies to this, can I white list based on > the list headers, or can it only be on the standard from to rcvd > headers ? > > If i cant whats the best way to prevent the list from being filtered ? SpamAssassin has no capability to prevent a message

Re: export and share database

Paul Smit wrote: > Is it a good idea to export and share databases to fight against spam? > No. Sharing bayes databases across different sites is a fundamentally flawed idea. That said, there are tons of places that do exactly this offer "starter" bayes databases. Really the ONLY time you shoul

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I too had missed that the bounce was from the list server. GTUBE idea withdrawn. > > 10.0, as I see from the X-ASF-Spam-Status header. > Maybe suggesting that samples be posted to pastebin could avoid this? Michele

RE: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Matt Kettler wrote: > Unfortunately, that's not likely to change, as there's more than just > this list hosted on the apache list server. The other lists benefit > greatly from the filter. There's no way to bypass spam-checking based on the envelope-recipient? -- Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.co

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Chris Santerre wrote: > Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. Expect > to see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or unsubscribe. > > >- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - > > (reason: 552 spam score (11.4) exceeded thre

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Chris Santerre wrote: Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. Expect to see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or unsubscribe. - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - (reason: 552 spam score (11.4) exceeded threshold)

RE: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Evan Platt wrote: >>> IIRC, the list runs spamassassin and would block your message before >>> it would make it to the list members. >> >> ... which kind of defeats Chris's point. > > Not entirely. The list has a higher than default thresho

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Evan Platt wrote: IIRC, the list runs spamassassin and would block your message before it would make it to the list members. ... which kind of defeats Chris's point. Not entirely. The list has a higher than default threshold.

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

On Wed, February 15, 2006 12:37 pm, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote: > You want us to unsubscribe the list server from the list? That's a > little drastic isn't it Chris? Heh, I didn't catch that the bounce was the list either. I thought it was a user subscribed to the list. I need more sleep.

RE: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Evan Platt wrote: > IIRC, the list runs spamassassin and would block your message before > it would make it to the list members. ... which kind of defeats Chris's point. -- Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902 Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com Software En

RE: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

On Wed, February 15, 2006 12:35 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > (must fight back evil ideas of sending a GTUBE to the list...) IIRC, the list runs spamassassin and would block your message before it would make it to the list members.

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

On Wed, February 15, 2006 12:22 pm, Chris Santerre wrote: > Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. Expect > to > see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or unsubscribe. > > >- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - > > (reason:

Re: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Chris Santerre wrote: Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. Expect to see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or unsubscribe. - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - (reason: 552 spam score (11.4) exceeded threshold)

export and share database

Is it a good idea to export and share databases to fight against spam?

RE: DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Chris Santerre wrote: > Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. > Expect to see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or > unsubscribe. (must fight back evil ideas of sending a GTUBE to the list...) -- Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964

RE: Stock image woes

A lot of what I'm seeing is hitting HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24 and has 12+ char gifs. So they have obviously added more text to alter the html to image ratio.The rule in 70_sare_stocks.cf looks for higher image ratios, meta SARE_STOX_IMG_ONLY ( __SHORT_GIF && ( HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_04 || HTML_IM

DO NOT Filter this list!!!

Title: DO NOT Filter this list!!! Come on guys. You can't spam filter a list that talks about spam. Expect to see examples posted. Either stop filtering this list, or unsubscribe.    - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -     (reason: 552 spam score (11.4) exceeded

RE: Stock image woes

Title: RE: Stock image woes Ahhh.I just caught the morph in this new series of spams. I'll write and test a new rule for it. Thanks for the examples. --Chris > -Original Message- > From: Craig Baird [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 1:07 PM > To: [

Re: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

Yes, If you use Spamcop in the RBL, don't use TOP200. I choose not to use Spamcop for personal reasons. I do, however, trust their top 200. - Original Message - From: "Joey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "SpamAssassin" Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 11:49 AM Subject: RE: Help wi

RE: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

Thanks for the heads up Matt, the rule has been removed. Ed --- Talk is cheap since supply always exceeds demand. --- -Original Message- From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent:

RE: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

Wouldn't the SARE_SPAMCOP_TOP200 already be working if you use spamcop in the RBL? Thanks -Original Message- From: [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 12:56 PM To: Joey; SpamAssassin Subject: Re: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard LMAO S

RE: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

Joey wrote: > OK I got a little greedy in hoping to stop more spam, to the point > that I am making my servers crawl. > > I read through the rules and I thought the difference between lets say > SARE_EVILNUMBERS0 SARE_EVILNUMBERS1 was that 1 was a little more > aggressive and if you used 1 you sho

RE: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

I missed that... Got it. THanks -Original Message- From: Dave Pooser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 1:05 PM To: SpamAssassin Subject: Re: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard > SARE_HTML > SARE_HTML0 > SARE_HTML1 > SARE_HTML2 > SARE_HTML3 > SARE_HTM

RE: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

Yes you are reading correctly. Really what I want to do is improve the list and keep as much spam fighting stuff in there, but try to tweak it where I don't kill the servers. 1 of the servers has a xeon 3GHZ processor and the other is a dual pIII 1GHZ. If you have any experience with some of the f

Re: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

Ed Russell wrote: > Ymmv of course, but here is the list that I use. I have read through the > descriptions of each and made a case by case decision. My average scanning > time is around 9.5 seconds. I did as you did in initially and added them > all. D'oh. Of course some rule sets are for spe

Re: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

Joey wrote: > OK I got a little greedy in hoping to stop more spam, to the point that I am > making my servers crawl. > > I read through the rules and I thought the difference between lets say > SARE_EVILNUMBERS0 SARE_EVILNUMBERS1 was that 1 was a little more aggressive > and if you used 1 you sho

Re: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

Joey wrote: Below is my config, how can I pick what to use -vs- not when we are getting slammed and need all the blocking we can, but of course don't want the server to die in the next 24 hours. I cleaned up the file some as you can see from my FIRST CONFIG FILE to SECOND. If I'm reading this

RE: Stock image woes

Quoting Greg Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > You are already sitting at 4 points here. Why don't you just up the SA > score > of either or both of these > > RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,RCVD_IN_XBL > > Problem solved. Not really. The problem would indeed be solved for *this* example. However, a lot o

Re: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

> SARE_HTML > SARE_HTML0 > SARE_HTML1 > SARE_HTML2 > SARE_HTML3 > SARE_HTML4 SARE_HTML includes the 0, 1, 2 and 3 rulesets, so you're duplicating some scans. Same with SARE_HEADER and some of the others IIRC -- Dave Pooser Cat-Herder-in-Chief Pooserville.com "This administration cannot be tru

Re: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

LMAO Sheesh! Here is what I have: SARE_SPAMCOP_TOP200 SARE_STOCKS EVILNUMBERS SARE_RANDOM SARE_ADULT SARE_FRAUD SARE_SPOOF SARE_OEM | | FIRST CONFIG FILE | | SA_DIR="/etc/mail/spamassassin" | SA_RESTART="killall -HUP sp

RE: Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

Ymmv of course, but here is the list that I use. I have read through the descriptions of each and made a case by case decision. My average scanning time is around 9.5 seconds. I did as you did in initially and added them all. D'oh. Of course some rule sets are for specific versions of SA, watc

new type of spam

Hi, I am getting a lot of new spam since yesterday with subject "Re: news". The body of the mail contains junk like, | Hi | CxIcAcLdIoSi x$q3i,s3r3t | V y A o LvleUtMw i$s1e,n2v1w | V o IhAyG you RsAs t $f3 o , g 7 g 5y | http://www.checpri.com How can I deal with the

Help with config... I went a LITTLE overboard

OK I got a little greedy in hoping to stop more spam, to the point that I am making my servers crawl. I read through the rules and I thought the difference between lets say SARE_EVILNUMBERS0 SARE_EVILNUMBERS1 was that 1 was a little more aggressive and if you used 1 you should also use 0 and so on

RE: Stock image woes

You are already sitting at 4 points here. Why don't you just up the SA score of either or both of these RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,RCVD_IN_XBL Problem solved. > -Original Message- > From: Craig Baird [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 11:52 AM > To: Chris Sante

RE: Stock image woes

Title: RE: Stock image woes > -Original Message- > From: Craig Baird [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 11:52 AM > To: Chris Santerre > Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org > Subject: RE: Stock image woes > > > Quoting Chris Santerre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >

RE: Stock image woes

Quoting Chris Santerre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > As of this morning, then updated SARE stock rules have additions to catch > these. :) > > Ninjas rule! (Except for the pink one. Which frieghtens us all.) I upgraded to the new SARE stock ruleset (1.00.05) early this morning. Unfortunately, there

Errors building 3.1.0

Hi. I'm trying to build an x86_64 version of SA 3.1.0 on FC3, and I'm seeing: [EMAIL PROTECTED] src]# rpmbuild -vv -tb Mail-SpamAssassin-3.1.0.tar.gz ... Manifying blib/man3/Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL.3pm Manifying blib/man3/Mail::SpamAssassin::BayesStore::PgSQL.3pm Manifying blib/man3

RE: Stock image woes

Title: RE: Stock image woes > -Original Message- > From: [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 10:56 AM > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org > Subject: Stock image woes > > > > All, > > Is anybody having any luck with the Stock spam that consists > o

Re: Doubling up of score on these Outlook rules?

On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 08:43:13AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >2.5 FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTMLOutlook can't send HTML message only > >3.4 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook > > I thought these were different tests? > > 1) test saying that Outlook can not send H

Re: newbie question

Matt Kettler wrote: > Peter Marshall wrote: > >> What do I have to put in the local.cf file to tell spam assasin to >> mark a particular email as spam ? >> > > Depends on what charachteristics of the email you're interested in > picking up on. More approaches I forgot to mention.. If you

Re: Doubling up of score on these Outlook rules?

Jason Haar wrote: I just received a (valid) email notification from a Web service that got a score of 7/5. It contained the following scores 2.5 FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTMLOutlook can't send HTML message only 3.4 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook That seems a bit

Re: clear folder after sa-learn scan

Paul Smit wrote: Does this mailutil also works for Dovecot IMAP folders? AFAIK it works on normal mbx format folders. 2006/2/15, Ronan McGlue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:36:29 +0100 Paul Smit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hey All, Can anyone tell me if there is a possibility

Re: newbie question

Peter Marshall wrote: > What do I have to put in the local.cf file to tell spam assasin to > mark a particular email as spam ? Depends on what charachteristics of the email you're interested in picking up on. If you merely want to blacklist all mail from the sender, you want to use a blacklist_fr

newbie question

What do I have to put in the local.cf file to tell spam assasin to mark a particular email as spam ? Thanks peter

Re: Doubling up of score on these Outlook rules?

On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 06:29:39PM +1300, Jason Haar wrote: > 2.5 FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTMLOutlook can't send HTML message only > 3.4 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook > > That seems a bit of a double-whammy doesn't it? I mean if SA think it's > forged Outlook (th

Re: clear folder after sa-learn scan

When I use this util, one message is created with the following subject: DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA Can I change this so it will not create this message? Regards, Paul 2006/2/15, Ronan McGlue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:36:29 +0100 > Paul Smit <[EMAIL

Re: clear folder after sa-learn scan

Does this mailutil also works for Dovecot IMAP folders? 2006/2/15, Ronan McGlue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:36:29 +0100 > Paul Smit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hey All, > > > > Can anyone tell me if there is a possibility to empty my > > "sa-lean" folder after I scanned it?

Re: clear folder after sa-learn scan

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:36:29 +0100 Paul Smit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey All, > > Can anyone tell me if there is a possibility to empty my > "sa-lean" folder after I scanned it? I want to delete all > mail in that mbox folder, because it's not being used > anymore. you can use the mail-util

clear folder after sa-learn scan

Hey All, Can anyone tell me if there is a possibility to empty my "sa-lean" folder after I scanned it? I want to delete all mail in that mbox folder, because it's not being used anymore. Please help... thanks!