It's in the configuration screens. It's the second screen under cpanel.
Do you mean to say that I cannot enter an IP address into the
"blacklist_from" boxes?
--
** Sean Mattingly([EMAIL PROTECTED])
** The Ultimate GTO Picture Site
** featuring Pontiac GTO cars 1964 - 2006.
** http://Ultimate
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 09:28:11PM -0500, Barry Callahan wrote:
> >58.171 62.4003 34.85560.642 0.820.01 T_RECEIVED_COUNT_01
> >I did up a quick check to gather some stats from my corpus (last 14 days).
> Interesting. I don't seem to have that rule. Which ruleset is it in?
> I used gre
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
BTW, it seems weird to me that you see these results.
58.171 62.4003 34.85560.642 0.820.01 T_RECEIVED_COUNT_01
Interesting. I don't seem to have that rule. Which ruleset is it in?
I used grep to search for "RECEIVED_COUNT" in all of my installed
rules
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Monnerie wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 16. März 2006 17:15 Stewart, John wrote:
>> Aye; thanks. Unfortunately, our current external DNS server doesn't
>> yet support SPF records. =(
>
> SPF is setup just via TXT records, what DNS software doesn't su
Barry Callahan:
> On a large percentage of the SPAM that gets through, the only
> Received: header that exists was put there by my mailserver.
BTW, it seems weird to me that you see these results.
58.171 62.4003 34.85560.642 0.820.01 T_RECEIVED_COUNT_01
I did up a quick check to ga
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 04:14:53PM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> Is there an easy way to get the list of all the debug facilities?
Not really, it's dynamic based on what you're doing. If you use just
"-D" and not specify any facilities you'll enable them all. You'll see
lines such as:
[751
On 3/16/2006 5:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Barry Callahan wrote:
On a large percentage of the SPAM that gets through, the only
Received: header that exists was put there by my mailserver.
The legitimate email, on the other hand ALL has at least one
additional Received: header, OR the machi
Am Donnerstag, 16. März 2006 23:46 schrieb Michael Monnerie:
> On Donnerstag, 16. März 2006 17:15 Stewart, John wrote:
> > Aye; thanks. Unfortunately, our current external DNS server
> > doesn't yet support SPF records. =(
let me rant a bit about SPF records.
Background info: my day job is fondl
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 02:07:31PM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote:
>
>
>>Hmmm... Couple of questions.. The UPGRADE file on the website still
>>reports 3.1.0
>>only...
>>
>>
>
>The UPGRADE file describes how to upgrade to 3.1.x from earlier versions.
>Upgrading from
Bret Miller a écrit :
>
> They have rationale. You can read it. They do not, however, as far as I
> know, state exactly what makes them think a message they receive is spam
> or legitimate.
>
> To quote them:
>
> "MXRate is not really a blacklist in the traditional sense. Our system
> analyzes d
Barry Callahan wrote:
> On a large percentage of the SPAM that gets through, the only
> Received: header that exists was put there by my mailserver.
>
> The legitimate email, on the other hand ALL has at least one
> additional Received: header, OR the machine it was received from is
> allowed to
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 05:15:58PM -0500, Barry Callahan wrote:
> I spent some time looking at the SPAM and compared it it to the
> legitimate email I receive.
:)
> So, I was wondering if the following set of logic would be possible to
> implement in SpamAssassin, either as a collection of rule
On Donnerstag, 16. März 2006 17:15 Stewart, John wrote:
> Aye; thanks. Unfortunately, our current external DNS server doesn't
> yet support SPF records. =(
SPF is setup just via TXT records, what DNS software doesn't support
that?
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc --- it-management Mic
Barry Callahan wrote:
> I'm running SpamAssassin 3.1.0 with sendmail, and I think it's great.
> I'm using milter-spamc to interface with SpamAssassin running as a daemon.
>
> It doesn't /quite/ catch everything, and some (very little, actually)
> SPAM gets through untagged.
>
> I spent some time
> > I use it or I wouldn't have known how to use it. ;)
> >
> > Like most other DNS blacklists, I wouldn't trust it
> completely. Whether
> > something is "spam" depends largely on the perception of the person
> > reviewing it. I don't know how you get in one list or another for
> > mxrate,
>
> If
I'm running SpamAssassin 3.1.0 with sendmail, and I think it's great.
I'm using milter-spamc to interface with SpamAssassin running as a daemon.
It doesn't /quite/ catch everything, and some (very little, actually)
SPAM gets through untagged.
I spent some time looking at the SPAM and compared
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 02:07:31PM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> Hmmm... Couple of questions.. The UPGRADE file on the website still
> reports 3.1.0
> only...
The UPGRADE file describes how to upgrade to 3.1.x from earlier versions.
Upgrading from 3.1.x to 3.1.y should be as straightforward
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 12:58:38PM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
>
>>Is there a What's New list somewhere?
>>
>>
>
>There was a list in the announcement and there's always the Changes file. :)
>
>
>
Hmmm... Couple of questions.. The UPGRADE file on the website stil
Theo, Carl,
I poked around the code this morning and I think for us, this is going
to be a tougher problem to solve than I first thought.
Theo, you are correct AFAIK the calls to the library routines
responsible for wrapping lines and adding in the \t chars are confused
by the lines they are rece
Bret Miller a écrit :
>
> I use it or I wouldn't have known how to use it. ;)
>
> Like most other DNS blacklists, I wouldn't trust it completely. Whether
> something is "spam" depends largely on the perception of the person
> reviewing it. I don't know how you get in one list or another for
> mxr
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:50:34PM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> Hmm. Thanks. Trying out the attachment, but having issues. Using 3.1.0
> on FC3 Linux.
>
> Updated the bug.
In general, it's bad to have the same conversation in multiple locations.
I'd prefer to discuss issues with the plug
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 09:58:52PM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote:
>
>
>>Ok, does anyone have *recent* statistical analysis (i.e. not almost a
>>year old)
>>on this? It could be that the people using this "boneheaded" construct have
>>realized the error of their ways, a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have configured SA on my hosting account through Cpanel.
> I've set up about 20 blacklist settings. It's supposed to blacklist
> according to certain IP addresses. Problem is - none of them are
> actually getting blocked! The spams are still streaming in by the doz
Bret Miller wrote:
Not SenderBase specifically, but MXRate is a similar service. See
www.mxrate.com for information.
Ah, Alligate, the server that "test incoming mail for RFC compliance",
but lacks a proper behaviour on RSET.
I hope this service is more sane. Any
> > Not SenderBase specifically, but MXRate is a similar service. See
> > www.mxrate.com for information.
>
> Ah, Alligate, the server that "test incoming mail for RFC compliance",
> but lacks a proper behaviour on RSET.
>
> I hope this service is more sane. Anybody with experience
> with MX? Might
Bret Miller wrote:
> Not SenderBase specifically, but MXRate is a similar service. See
> www.mxrate.com for information.
Ah, Alligate, the server that "test incoming mail for RFC compliance",
but lacks a proper behaviour on RSET.
I hope this service is more sane. Anybody with experience with MX?
Michael W Cocke a écrit :
>
> You could never convince me to do that - the CPAN install facility is
> just too useful for me to do anything that would impede my using it!
> (Was that a sentence? it's too early here.)
>
> I install anything perl from either CPAN or source tarball, in that
> order
Just upgraded to 3.1.1 and it appears that there is some issue with it
calling dccifd now. The initialization test works correctly but subsequent
checks always fail and log 'dcc: dccifd check failed - no X-DCC returned:'
This was working correctly with 3.1.0. dcc checking via dccproc works as
exp
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:33:50AM -0600, David B Funk wrote:
> Silly question; would it be sufficient for the milter to just canonicalize
> the message that it passes to SA by converting CRLF to a plain LF?
> Or better, do the inverse of SA; for it to look at the first line of
> the message and if
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 10:37:49AM -0300, Jeferson Pessoa Santana wrote:
> Does anyone know how to use Sender Base to check e-mails with SpamAssassin?
> For those who doesn't know Sender Base : www.senderbase.org.
It's actually pretty easy, however we've specifically been asked by the owners
of Se
Stewart, John wrote:
>> On Donnerstag, 16. März 2006 08:16 David B Funk wrote:
>>> No, but in the SPF record for "artesyncp.com" you should list the
>>> names of the outgoing SMTP servers so SA (and the world) will know
>>> that they are 'permitted' to source mail for "artesyncp.com".
>
> Aye; tha
> On Donnerstag, 16. März 2006 08:16 David B Funk wrote:
> > No, but in the SPF record for "artesyncp.com" you should list the
> > names of the outgoing SMTP servers so SA (and the world) will know
> > that they are 'permitted' to source mail for "artesyncp.com".
Aye; thanks. Unfortunately, our
> Jeferson Pessoa Santana wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Does anyone know how to use Sender Base to check e-mails with
> > SpamAssassin?
> >
> > For those who doesn't know Sender Base : www.senderbase.org.
>
> And to quote senderbase:
>
> "SenderBase is a reporting tool used by network
> administrator
Jeferson Pessoa Santana wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Does anyone know how to use Sender Base to check e-mails with
> SpamAssassin?
>
> For those who doesn't know Sender Base : www.senderbase.org.
And to quote senderbase:
"SenderBase is a reporting tool used by network administrators to
investigate traff
Hello list, I have a script that takes spam from an mbox, splits it into
single messages via formail, and runs them into spamc. But spamc
produces errors on reporting to pyzor and razor, while DCC seems to
work. SA is 3.1.1, what could be wrong?
I'm "su -l vscan", and when I report to razor man
Hi guys,
Does anyone know how to use Sender Base to check e-mails with SpamAssassin?
For those who doesn't know Sender Base : www.senderbase.org.
Thanks,
Jeff
From: "Alexander Vranken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
it, and got all zeros for every number. Is there an init step that's
non-obvious (I set the config info up), or did this version not work?
You need to specify a time range for it to use. You also have to have log
data for it to extract.
The
sa-stats.pl --help
Then fill in start and end "times". The one Dallas did is much better.
You might have to search the archives for his sa-stats.pl version. It is
worth it.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Michael W Cocke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I never looked in the tools directory b
> it, and got all zeros for every number. Is there an init step that's
> non-obvious (I set the config info up), or did this version not work?
>
>You need to specify a time range for it to use. You also have to have log
data for it to extract.
>
>The default time range seems to be "After today"
> it, and got all zeros for every number. Is there an init step that's
> non-obvious (I set the config info up), or did this version not work?
You need to specify a time range for it to use. You also have to have log
data for it to extract.
The default time range seems to be "After today", whic
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 18:24:41 -0500, you wrote:
>jdow wrote:
>
>>
>> OK, when the storage structure of the tarball based package you want
>> changes how do you extirpate the old and insert the new without the
>> rather depressingly familiar dual SpamAssassin install? (Not that the
>> package syste
I never looked in the tools directory before, but I just noticed
sa-stats. (sa-stats version 6256, SA version 3.10). I tried running
it, and got all zeros for every number. Is there an init step that's
non-obvious (I set the config info up), or did this version not work?
It's not a priority - SA
Hello List,
i hope somebody can help me here, since i got no feedback on
my problem elsewhere.
For 2 days now, one of my users on a SuSE 9.3 Box with mail-delivery
through fetchmail->sendmail->/home/user/.procmailrc->spamassassin
receives no mail anymore. Beside that he even can't log into the
w
On Donnerstag, 16. März 2006 08:16 David B Funk wrote:
> No, but in the SPF record for "artesyncp.com" you should list the
> names of the outgoing SMTP servers so SA (and the world) will know
> that they are 'permitted' to source mail for "artesyncp.com".
You can look at http://openspf.org there's
On Donnerstag, 16. März 2006 02:19 Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:26:32AM +0100, Michael Monnerie wrote:
> > > A channel is essentially a set of rules published by some
> > > organization, which is accessed and downloaded via dns/http. ie:
> >
> > Would that be a possible repl
45 matches
Mail list logo
