On 4/19/06, Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Monnerie wrote:
> > On Dienstag, 18. April 2006 17:20 Carl Chipman wrote:
> >
> >> I'm getting a bunch of these
> >> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.6 required=6.0
> >> tests=BAYES_50: 1.567,HTML_70_80: 0.039,HTML_MESSAGE: 0.001
> >>
> >
martin wrote:
> using FC3 + spamassassin 3.0.4+ spamass-milter 0.3.0 + sendmail, work fine.
> But wonder can spamassassin only scan income local delivery mail but not outgo
> mail? Coz outer recv. may not will to see the mail subject added some tag like
> "[SPAM]".
> thx
>
>
What mail SA sc
From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ronnie Tartar wrote:
I have all the default rules that come with the package, and the following
in the rulesdujour config
TRIPWIRE SARE_ADULT SARE_OBFU0 SARE_OBFU1 SARE_URI0 SARE_URI1 SARE_HTML_ENG
SARE_FRAUD SARE_SPOOF SARE_RANDOM SARE_STOCKS"
Do you
Mike,
That sounds like a script I am interested in- Can you send me a copy?
TIA,
Dave Augustus
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 17:24 -0700, Mike Jackson wrote:
> > That seems fine - I'd expect that for a package like SpamAssassin, the
> > default rules (plus Razor and Pyzor) would be very good at identi
martin excite.com> writes:
>
> using FC3 + spamassassin 3.0.4+ spamass-milter 0.3.0 + sendmail, work fine.
> But wonder can spamassassin only scan income local delivery mail but not outgo
> mail? Coz outer recv. may not will to see the mail subject added some tag like
> "[SPAM]".
> thx
jus
Mike Jackson wrote:
SARE RULESETS:
70_sare_adult.cf: 10
70_sare_bayes_poison_nxm.cf: 0
70_sare_html0.cf: 1
70_sare_obfu0.cf: 1
70_sare_oem.cf: 30
70_sare_specific.cf: 5
70_sare_spoof.cf: 14
70_sare_stocks.cf: 69
70_sc_top200.cf: 1
WooHoo! 70_sare_stocks.cf hits my favorite number! Sorry just
using FC3 + spamassassin 3.0.4+ spamass-milter 0.3.0 + sendmail, work fine.
But wonder can spamassassin only scan income local delivery mail but not outgo
mail? Coz outer recv. may not will to see the mail subject added some tag like
"[SPAM]".
thx
mouss wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone else noticed a major spike in backscatter from AOL servers?
No. can you share that (publishing the actual backscatter)?
I'll post log entries from postfix as soon as I can sanitize them to
protect our addresses.
Ronnie Tartar wrote:
> I have all the default rules that come with the package, and the following
> in the rulesdujour config
>
> TRIPWIRE SARE_ADULT SARE_OBFU0 SARE_OBFU1 SARE_URI0 SARE_URI1 SARE_HTML_ENG
> SARE_FRAUD SARE_SPOOF SARE_RANDOM SARE_STOCKS"
>
> Do you think that is too much?
>
No.
I have all the default rules that come with the package, and the following
in the rulesdujour config
TRIPWIRE SARE_ADULT SARE_OBFU0 SARE_OBFU1 SARE_URI0 SARE_URI1 SARE_HTML_ENG
SARE_FRAUD SARE_SPOOF SARE_RANDOM SARE_STOCKS"
Do you think that is too much?
Thanks
-Original Message-
From:
Yeah, I just checked the latest SVN snapshot, it doesn't have this
either.
Looking closer at that page, it also mentions required_hits, but does
not mention it as deprecated. required_hits became deprecated in SA
3.0.0.
It also doesn't mention report_safe, which was present in the
release
Dan wrote:
> Thanks Matt,
>
> That certainly would explain my problem. The entry is listed near the
> bottom of this page:
>
> http://bmrc.berkeley.edu/resources/how_to/email/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html
>
>
> Checking Google, its the only page in the world saying "meta
> SYMBOLIC_TEST_NAME regular
From: "Mike Jackson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Matt Kettler's advice in the "Good ruleset" thread made me wonder just how
many spams the various rule files I'm using actually catch. So, I wrote a
quick Perl script to look at the rule files and check a stat script's output
(against today's logs) for
Thanks Matt,
That certainly would explain my problem. The entry is listed near
the bottom of this page:
http://bmrc.berkeley.edu/resources/how_to/email/
Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html
Checking Google, its the only page in the world saying "meta
SYMBOLIC_TEST_NAME regular expression." Its
That seems fine - I'd expect that for a package like SpamAssassin, the
default rules (plus Razor and Pyzor) would be very good at identifying
spam. However, this was the part that surprised me:
Sorry to reply to my own post, and before anyone had a chance to. I tried
this on my personal server
Dan wrote:
>
>
> This is the section of the manual I'm following:
>
> meta SYMBOLIC_TEST_NAME regular expression
> Finally, parts of a meta rule may be defined by a regexp followed by
> an operator. All rules matching the regular expression will be strung
> together, with the given operator between
Matt Kettler's advice in the "Good ruleset" thread made me wonder just how
many spams the various rule files I'm using actually catch. So, I wrote a
quick Perl script to look at the rule files and check a stat script's output
(against today's logs) for the rules that spam messages matched, then
Ronnie Tartar wrote:
> I am struggling with a good set of rules to enable with the rulesdujour.
> Some of my spam scores are in the 30's etc... Now, maybe I've enabled too
> many rules, I am on v3.1.1 on FC4. Any advice would be helpful.
Do not enable antidrug. These rules are included in SA 3.0
Try changing your subject tag slightly and see if the tag in the mail
changes. If not (and you remembered to restart spamd) then someone else is
tagging it.
Loren
I am struggling with a good set of rules to enable with the rulesdujour.
Some of my spam scores are in the 30's etc... Now, maybe I've enabled too
many rules, I am on v3.1.1 on FC4. Any advice would be helpful. I am
running it with Amavis-new, mysql.
Thanks
I have an similar meta question,
I'm trying to include all tests conforming to a wildcard (*) meta
entry so I don't have to type out each member. This is the
configuration I have so far but as you can see, RemoveBBB is not
scoring. Is what I'm attempting possible and am I doing it
corre
Steve Sargent wrote:
Is there a reference manual with SpamAssassin, and if so were do I
get a copy of it?
Its not all inclusive, but I've found this book to be a handy beginning:
http://www.packtpub.com/book/spamassassin
Dan
Tracee wrote:
Good questions. Not being the one who configures SpamAssassin, I
thought it might be configured to know it's own domain name.
You could write a rule on a site-by-site basis, or perhaps introduce a
configuration option. Even then, it wouldn't work quite right for sites
that rec
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone else noticed a major spike in backscatter from AOL servers?
No. can you share that (publishing the actual backscatter)?
Paul Dulaba wrote:
> As far as I know, SpamAssassin does.
Ahh.. Yes it does.. Nevermind..
That said, the presence of that header doesn't really mean much. SA only adds
that when it tags. If another SA instance did the tagging, your site would not
have modified X-Spam-Prev-Subject.
However, the d
As far as I know, SpamAssassin does.On 4/20/06, Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Dulaba wrote:> I am contacting the originator, as they are basically another> department, to see if they are running anything. I doubt they are> though, they currently use tags of [SPAM-high].
>> The other
Paul Dulaba wrote:
> I am contacting the originator, as they are basically another
> department, to see if they are running anything. I doubt they are
> though, they currently use tags of [SPAM-high].
>
> The other thing that makes it look like my system is the
> X-Spam-Prev-Subject: Court of App
I am contacting the originator, as they are basically another department, to see if they are running anything. I doubt they are though, they currently use tags of [SPAM-high].The other thing that makes it look like my system is the
X-Spam-Prev-Subject: Court of Appeal Judgments to be filedThe mes
On 4/20/06, Michael Monnerie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 22:45 Benjamin Adams wrote:
> > yes I"m using amavisd
>
> That's why you don't get stats. Maybe somebody knows a way to make
> amavisd call spamd?
>
amavisd-new uses Mail::SpamAssassin directly, and can't be co
On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 22:45 Benjamin Adams wrote:
> yes I"m using amavisd
That's why you don't get stats. Maybe somebody knows a way to make
amavisd call spamd?
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc- http://it-management.at
// Tel: 0660/4156531 .n
On Apr 20, 2006, at 4:45 PM, Benjamin Adams wrote:
yes I"m using amavisd
on mac OS X 10.4 but mainly updated to spamassassin 3.1.1
***Manually
On Apr 20, 2006, at 4:45 PM, Michael Monnerie wrote:
On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 22:26 Benjamin Adams wrote:
Nothing:
Same for me, maybe you a
yes I"m using amavisd
on mac OS X 10.4 but mainly updated to spamassassin 3.1.1
On Apr 20, 2006, at 4:45 PM, Michael Monnerie wrote:
On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 22:26 Benjamin Adams wrote:
Nothing:
Same for me, maybe you are using amavisd-new too? Amavis doesn't call
spamd (*very stupidly*
On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 22:41 Benjamin Adams wrote:
> spamc is not running on the server
spamc is the program that calls spamd. Try "spamc --help" to see what it
does.
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc- http://it-management.at
// Tel: 0660/4156531
On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 22:26 Benjamin Adams wrote:
> Nothing:
Same for me, maybe you are using amavisd-new too? Amavis doesn't call
spamd (*very stupidly*), and therefore spamd doesn't log anything.
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc- http://it-management.at
// Tel: 066
spamc is not running on the server
root 9888 0.0 -1.253848 24272 ?? Ss4:30PM
0:02.35 /usr/bin/spamd -d -v --syslog=/var/log/spamd.log
root 9889 0.0 -0.153816 1912 ?? S 4:30PM 0:00.02
spamd child
root 9890 0.0 -0.153816 1872 ?? S 4:30P
1) "ls -l /var/log/spamd.log". Is it present and not empty?
2) /etc/mail/spamassassin/sa-stats.pl --help
3) What IS the actual command you used when running spamd as a service?
It looks like you are trying to run it as a user and immediately after
running it get some log printouts. That is n
> -Original Message-
> From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 15:20
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Looking for a STATS program
>
> Benjamin Adams wrote:
> > Yea I have that but when I try running saying where my
> spamd.log files
Benjamin Adams wrote:
> Nothing:
> ./sa-stats.pl -l /var/log -f spamd.log
>
>
> Email:0 Autolearn: 0 AvgScore: 0.00 AvgScanTime:
> 0.00 sec
> Spam: 0 Autolearn: 0 AvgScore: 0.00 AvgScanTime:
> 0.00 sec
> Ham: 0 Autolearn: 0 AvgScore: 0.00 AvgSca
> -Original Message-
> From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 15:20
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Looking for a STATS program
>
> Benjamin Adams wrote:
> > Yea I have that but when I try running saying where my
> spamd.log files
Nothing:
./sa-stats.pl -l /var/log -f spamd.log
Email:0 Autolearn: 0 AvgScore: 0.00 AvgScanTime:
0.00 sec
Spam: 0 Autolearn: 0 AvgScore: 0.00 AvgScanTime:
0.00 sec
Ham: 0 Autolearn: 0 AvgScore: 0.00 AvgScanTime:
0.00 sec
Time Spent R
Benjamin Adams wrote:
> Yea I have that but when I try running saying where my spamd.log
> files is I get nothing
> spamd -d --syslog=/var/log/spamd.log
> I run:
> ./sa-stats.pl -f /var/log/spamd.log
> The log has no stats what option am I looking for with spamd?
That command line is not quite rig
On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 16:12 Gary V wrote:
> [qr'^(bulkmail|offers|cheapbenefits|earnmoney|foryou)@'i =>
> 5.0],
> sender 'bulkmail' will add 5 points
Yak, that's ugly. I never saw that amavis makes this. And it must be my
bank changed the server, as they occasionally send me that
Paul Dulaba wrote:
> Just upgraded to SA 3.1 from 3.04. Running on SLES 9. I have a couple
> examples of a message that SA scores as Ham, but that still got the
> Subject line re-written:
Any chance it got scanned by two different copies of SA? Including the sending
side?
If a second SA scans a
> -Original Message-
> From: Rick Macdougall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 15:05
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Looking for a STATS program
>
> Benjamin Adams wrote:
> > what was used for this:
> > OVERALL% SPAM% HAM% S/ORANK
Rick Macdougall wrote:
> Benjamin Adams wrote:
> > what was used for this:
> > OVERALL% SPAM% HAM% S/ORANK SCORE NAME
> > 6696841748252200.623 0.00 0.00 (all messages)
> > 882 88201.000 1.00 0.75 SARE_OEM_PRODS_1
> > 700 700
Yea I have that but when I try running saying where my spamd.log
files is I get nothing
spamd -d --syslog=/var/log/spamd.log
I run:
./sa-stats.pl -f /var/log/spamd.log
The log has no stats
what option am I looking for with spamd?
On Apr 20, 2006, at 4:04 PM, Rick Macdougall wrote:
Hi,
That
Benjamin Adams wrote:
what was used for this:
OVERALL% SPAM% HAM% S/ORANK SCORE NAME
6696841748252200.623 0.00 0.00 (all messages)
882 88201.000 1.00 0.75 SARE_OEM_PRODS_1
700 70001.000 0.94 1.00 SARE_OEM_OBFU
what was used for this:
OVERALL% SPAM% HAM% S/ORANK SCORE NAME
6696841748252200.623 0.00 0.00 (all messages)
882 88201.000 1.00 0.75 SARE_OEM_PRODS_1
700 70001.000 0.94 1.00 SARE_OEM_OBFU
606 606
Just upgraded to SA 3.1 from 3.04. Running on SLES 9. I have a couple examples of a message that SA scores as Ham, but that still got the Subject line re-written:==
From: "Court of Appeal Distribution" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: <[EMAIL PR
I'm going to start changing rules but would like to get away to view
stats first.
Something like:
Past 7 day stats for USERNAME:
RULES Mark SPAM Mark HAM
HTML_MESSAGE28 20
UNPARSEABL
Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed
---
t/prefs_include.t21 50.00% 1
14 tests skipped.
Failed 1/94 test scripts, 98.94% okay. 1/2086 subtests failed, 99.95%
okay.
make: ***
I know this is not SpamAssassin related but it used to be that mail
quarantined by amavis would not reflect any of the @score_sender_maps score
changes.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=amavis-user&m=112145822701374&w=2
A change was made in version 2.3.3:
- in quarantined mail the reported spa
Steve Sargent wrote:
> Is there a reference manual with SpamAssassin, and if so were do I
> get a copy of it?
There's not a manual per-se, but there is quite a bit of information here:
http://spamassassin.apache.org/doc.html
and here:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/
In particular, take a lo
Steve Sargent wrote:
Is there a reference manual with SpamAssassin, and if so were do I get a
copy of it?
http://spamassassin.apache.org/doc.html
Cheers
Richard
Is there a reference manual with SpamAssassin, and if so were do I get a
copy of it?
--
Steve Sargent, Vox +44 020 7882 3220, Fax +44 020 8980 2001
QMUL Computing Services, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, UK
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW page: http://www.qmul.ac.uk/~cgaa160/index.html
Interesting trick. It's a shame amavis doesn't identify when it doctors the
score in the X-Spam-Status header. It would be nice if it reported
something like:
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=5.55 amavisd=5.00 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=NO_REAL_NAME=0.55
so you could tell how much of the sc
Gary V wrote:
>
> In amavisd.conf:
>
> [qr'^(bulkmail|offers|cheapbenefits|earnmoney|foryou)@'i => 5.0],
>
> sender 'bulkmail' will add 5 points
>
> You can set:
>
> $remove_existing_spam_headers = 0;
Interesting trick. It's a shame amavis doesn't identify when it doctors the
score i
On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, Razvan Cosma wrote:
> Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 15:01:41 ???
The cruft in the Date: header may be a good spam sign.
> X-MS-Has-Attach:
> X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Those two headers being present and empty may be a very good spam
sign.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZICQ#15735746h
On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 15:50 Matt Kettler wrote:
> I don't know.. but another question would be does amavisd-new
> correctly handle AWL hits?
I didn't see a mistake those last years, and yes, I have correct AWL
mails. This is in the header from your mail:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.102 ta
On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 15:50 Matt Kettler wrote:
> I don't know.. but another question would be does amavisd-new
> correctly handle AWL hits?
I didn't see a mistake those last years, and yes, I have correct AWL
mails. This is in the header from your mail:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.102 tag
Michael Monnerie wrote:
> Hello, I just received some ham from my bank, with information about new
> stocks - trustful, I would say (as far as you can trust your bank,
> though).
>
> Now here are the headers:
>
> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zmi.at
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=5.55 tagged_above=
On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 14:09 Michael Monnerie wrote:
> Now here are the headers:
I've checked the logs on the "outer" mailgate, there it was ham:
CLEAN, [193.164.224.209] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ->
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Hits: 3.372,
10101 ms
Mails are rechec
Hi,
We're filtering email for schools with SA and so wish to put some very
strict Porn filtering in place. It seems the best way to achieve this
would be to heavily increase the score on adult content rules in our
local.cf.
However, the idea of selecting every single adult rule doesn't appea
Hi,
Michael Monnerie wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 20. April 2006 14:28 Razvan Cosma wrote:
>
>> Body formatting varies slightly, text remains the same.
>>
>
> Then write some body rules that catch the text.
>
>
I have no idea how to do that..
what the user reads on the screen is
"Your credit
Hello, I just received some ham from my bank, with information about new
stocks - trustful, I would say (as far as you can trust your bank,
though).
Now here are the headers:
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zmi.at
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=5.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=NO_REAL_NAME=0.
Has anyone else noticed a major spike in backscatter from AOL servers?
66 matches
Mail list logo
