Dear list,
yesterday I've got some new kind of spam:
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from abruxateatro.com (unknown [210.245.161.31])
by power2u.goelsen.net (Postfix) with SMTP id
for _; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:25:57 +0200 (CEST)
On 12 Jun 2006, at 07:53, Michael Monnerie wrote:
yesterday I've got some new kind of spam:
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from abruxateatro.com (unknown [210.245.161.31])
by power2u.goelsen.net (Postfix) with SMTP id
for _; Sun, 11 Jun
On Donnerstag, 8. Juni 2006 17:33 Gary V wrote:
What's surprising is that you are surprised that someone can make
mail appear to come from you. There is nothing stopping them.
That's not true: SPF. Of course, only if the recipient checks for SPF
records, but lots of sites check it now (anyway
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rolf wrote:
I have just noticed the same thing.
Increase in false positives due to that rule telling me the upstream
mail server addresses (which I don't control) have been listed in
combined-HIB.dnsiplists.completewhois.com.
Which is not
Well yes Exchange does have it's problems (its much better than it used to
be), but ya gotta remember the underlying DB is Access.
I think there are moves afoot for the next version of MS-Ex to be able to
run with SQl-Server as the backend datastore (2003 may already have this
ability) which is
The intersil.net domain name has expired (probably inadvertently) and is
pending renewal or deletion. Thanks to the Network Solutions redirecting it
by cname to resalehost.networksolutions.com it will return positive to every
address. Yet another fine contribution to net stability by the good
Hi all,
Details can be found below..
One thing I have noticed is that spamc appears to be version 3.1.3 and
spamassassin appears to be version 3.1.1??
Leaving the mail client out of it seems that even from the cli SA scores
spam very low, see example spamassassin -D of obvious spam at
With --lint, I am getting the following error:
[2900] warn: config: failed to parse, now a plugin, skipping: ok_languages
en fr es
I have looked up the docs here:
http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.1.x/dist/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Plugin_
TextCat.html
and it seems to say that a setting of:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ben Wylie wrote:
With --lint, I am getting the following error:
[2900] warn: config: failed to parse, now a plugin, skipping: ok_languages
en fr es
I have looked up the docs here:
Try using the SARE stocks rule:
http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules.htm#stocks
Jeff C.
--
Jeff Chan
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.surbl.org/
With --lint, I am getting the following error:
[2900] warn: config: failed to parse, now a plugin, skipping:
ok_languages en fr es
Why am I getting this error message?
make sure that you have the textcat plugin loaded in either your
init.pre or v3xx.pre files.
Thanks, it wasn't enabled
just to check...
I currently use sa-learn by getting a cross-section of my userbase to
copy ALL their spam into a shared imap folder. This bypasses any extra
headers being added if they were to forward etc.
Some of the messages, (the majority) will have already been scanned by
bayes and have a
Hi, I use postfix-2.1.5-5 with spamassassin-3.0.4 and amavisd-new-2.3.2, I
would want to block to all the mail coming from a specific IP address, can
use:
blacklist_from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
thanks.
--
Salvatore.
For some reason when I upgraded recently, Spamassassin is now placing the
X-Spam headers at the top of the email rather than at the end of the headers
section as it had been. Is there an option I can set, or does anyone know
why it has suddenly changed where it puts the headers?
Thanks
Ben
It's a bug in spamass-milter 0.3.0. Upgrade to 0.3.1
-Sietse
From: Ben Wylie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 12-Jun-06 12:56
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: X-Spam-Headers at top of email
For some reason when I upgraded recently, Spamassassin
Ben Wylie wrote:
I am running SpamAssassin version 3.1.2 on windows 2003 server called via
the command line, so I think it must be something in SpamAssassin that
has
changed.
There was a change introduced in SA 3.1.0.
This has been discussed on this list before, a quick search will find
the
Well, it has. But AFAIK it has not caused problems on other than spamass-milter.
Search the mailing list, there's much more on this issue. But not sure about
win2003 installations of it.
-Sietse
From: Ben Wylie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 12-Jun-06
Hi Sietse,
The original poster didn't actually explain why this was a problem for
him. So I was explaining why the position of the headers had changed.
Sietse van Zanen wrote:
Well, it has. But AFAIK it has not caused problems on other than spamass-milter.
Search the mailing list, there's
Ronan McGlue wrote:
just to check...
I currently use sa-learn by getting a cross-section of my userbase to
copy ALL their spam into a shared imap folder. This bypasses any extra
headers being added if they were to forward etc.
Some of the messages, (the majority) will have already been scanned
Well, I think he was talking about the headers popping up in the e-mail (the
body), and thtat is definitely a problem. And looks very much like the problem
casued by/with spamass-milter.
But he indeed should have been more clear, not even specifying whcih platform,
new + old versions,
Jo,
I think, this is not the answer to the exact question.
If I understood the question correctly, Ronan asked whether sa-learn
would ignore the headers that were inserted in mails that have been
SCANNED, but probably not yet LEARNED.
If I am right, then the answer might be found in the
Sasa wrote on Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:55:41 +0200:
Hi, I use postfix-2.1.5-5 with spamassassin-3.0.4 and amavisd-new-2.3.2, I
would want to block to all the mail coming from a specific IP address, can
use:
blacklist_from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
Use the access list of your MTA.
Kai
--
Kai
Hi,
I reread the original email and I agree it can be read both ways.
Without further information it is hard to tell.
Anyway, the OP now has enough clues to at least come back here with more
information.
Sietse van Zanen wrote:
Well, I think he was talking about the headers popping up in
On Monday 23 January 2006 15:50, Matt Kettler took the opportunity to write:
Glen Carreras wrote:
I've enabled the DK plugin (and applied
the patch) and for the most part, I believe DK is working but, the
following two headers confuse me as they appear to be conflicting
statements. Are
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, sasa wrote:
Hi, I use postfix-2.1.5-5 with spamassassin-3.0.4 and
amavisd-new-2.3.2, I would want to block to all the mail coming
from a specific IP address, can use:
blacklist_from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
Waiting until SA gets the message is needlessly wasteful of system
On Monday 03 October 2005 18:14, Nix took the opportunity to write:
On Sat, 1 Oct 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] stated:
Which begs the question I don't remember anybody asking: What the
censored is DomainKeys and why should it experience a special
exception to sane ordering if header information
hi
what is the correct procedure to enable to spam.blacklist file
I edited a file /etc/ and changed a line
Is Definitely Spam = %rules-dir%/spam.blacklist.rules
High Scoring Spam Actions = store
and then I created a spam.blacklist file and edited it
FromOrTo: name at isp.comyes
I can't recall seeing any mention in this thread of DBmail (dbmail.org),
which already exists and is an all-in-one SMTP/POP3/IMAP server with MySQL
or Postgres message storage (with support for SQLite on the way). It's been
in development for three or four years, and from what I remember is
All,
I bought a Barracuda Model 400 last October. My current setup is as follows:
Barracuda GW --- Internal servers --- Spamassassin server --- Quarantine or
local delivery.
Although there was a small percentage of spam being caught by adding the
Barracuda, this was because
I added my own
We have a 400 as well. I don't think one can even compare SA
out-of-the-box and the Barracuda. I'm catching more Spam with the use of
SA with no rules loaded than what our Barracuda is tagging. I've taken
messages that came off the Barracuda and thew it through SA. SA scored
almost 2.5 points
| I pretty much at this time strictly use the Barracuda as a buffer to 'tone'
down
| traffic that would make our server drop to its knees. We are in process
| of getting a firewall in place and when that happens, the Barracuda will
| probably go bye..bye when I start building access lists.
On Monday, June 12, 2006, 10:23:20 AM, wrote:
I bought a Barracuda Model 400 last October. My current setup is as follows:
Barracuda GW --- Internal servers --- Spamassassin server --- Quarantine or
local delivery.
Although there was a small percentage of spam being caught by adding
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, slyandjen wrote:
what is the correct procedure to enable to spam.blacklist file
I edited a file /etc/ and changed a line
Is Definitely Spam = %rules-dir%/spam.blacklist.rules
High Scoring Spam Actions = store
and then I created a spam.blacklist file and edited it
FromOrTo:
Actually I mentioned that to my Barracuda sales person (we have the
Spyware Firewall which is really good) and he told me that they started
with SpamAssassin, but have since moved to their own software.
--
Benjamin Story, CCNA CCDA
Network Administrator
Dot Foods, Inc
www.dotfoods.com
IT
Jeff Chan wrote:
Doesn't Barracuda use SpamAssassin in their boxes? If so it's
not too surprising that it wouldn't perform much differently from
SpamAssassin :-)
It's probably using an old version *shrug*
Barracuda may not use SARE, so SARE may indeed be better.
Quite possibly
Logan Shaw wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, slyandjen wrote:
what is the correct procedure to enable to spam.blacklist file
I edited a file /etc/ and changed a line
Is Definitely Spam = %rules-dir%/spam.blacklist.rules
High Scoring Spam Actions = store
and then I created a spam.blacklist file and
Mike Jackson wrote:
I can't recall seeing any mention in this thread of DBmail (dbmail.org),
which already exists and is an all-in-one SMTP/POP3/IMAP server with
MySQL or Postgres message storage (with support for SQLite on the way).
It's been in development for three or four years, and from
I'm very sorry for not being clearer or provide the required information.
The change is that the X-Spam headers are now at the very top of the headers
section, whereas previously they had been at the bottom of the headers. This
is not a problem, but was unexpected and I thought it to be some sort
FromOrTo: name at isp.comyes
FromOrTo: name2 at isp2.com yes
FromOrTo: default no
these are just demos
they are usually filled with normal addresses
I fixed the problem today but all I want to know is where is the email
stored if they are not send to the user
--
View
Examine the headers if this email, Ben.
You should see something like this:
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net;
b=i4B11JScmztoFnQh3L1dmNgJJ5LVrH4KvL6IDhr5usaFJCVhE+LJEBcXMk75qfx+;
From: slyandjen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FromOrTo: name at isp.comyes
FromOrTo: name2 at isp2.com yes
FromOrTo: default no
these are just demos
they are usually filled with normal addresses
I fixed the problem today but all I want to know is where is the email
stored if they
From: slyandjen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
if I have blacklist file which one shouldit be?
I'vre seen people using yes and some uses store
Definite Spam Is High Scoring = yes or strore
Your question is somewhat garbled due to poor English usage.
What blacklist file? is the question that comes to
Slyandjen wrote on Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:21:20 -0700 (PDT):
I fixed the problem today but all I want to know is where is the email
stored if they are not send to the user
In the quarantine.
- wiki.mailscanner.info
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet
ok sorry
spam.blacklist.rules this is the blacklist file I was talking about
MailScanner.conf this is the I was asking about a line
Definite Spam Is High Scoring =
if I use the spam.blacklist.rules file what should it be on this line?
Definite Spam Is High Scoring = yes or
RE: For those who are considering a Barracuda Network Device server|Funny
story, I've had phone
conversations with them about being possibly employed. I got weird mixed
signals. Things didn't seem
right. I heard a |few stories. They asked me to come up with a solution of some
sorts, which I
I don't speak MailScanner. So I answered with generalities for spam
disposition.
I'd seriously check any MailScanner mailing lists for help with its
inner details.
{o.o}
- Original Message -
From: slyandjen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ok sorry
spam.blacklist.rules this is the blacklist
slyandjen wrote:
ok sorry
spam.blacklist.rules this is the blacklist file I was talking about
MailScanner.conf this is the I was asking about a line
Definite Spam Is High Scoring =
if I use the spam.blacklist.rules file what should it be on this line?
Definite Spam Is High
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 11:41 -0600, wrote:
| I pretty much at this time strictly use the Barracuda as a buffer to 'tone'
down
| traffic that would make our server drop to its knees. We are in process
| of getting a firewall in place and when that happens, the Barracuda will
| probably
I took a look at them as a way to possibly go to a gui spam server because
some of the other admins at my company are not linux gurus by any stretch,
but these lacked some of the necessary functionality that would give me
cause to actually pay for one. Course.. If anyone doesn't know.. Use
If I was feeling stinky I'd note that I do not like web administration
tools as much as I like editing the files myself by hand doing things
I understand from an overdose of RTFM. And I'm not a Linux guy last
time I checked myself in front of a mirror.
{^,-} But I'm not. (Besides ix guy is
But isn't that that beauty of SA. You don't have to be a Linux guy to
install it.
-Original Message-
From: jdow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 7:35 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: For those who are considering a Barracuda Network Device
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 19:34 -0700, jdow wrote:
If I was feeling stinky I'd note that I do not like web administration
tools as much as I like editing the files myself by hand doing things
I understand from an overdose of RTFM. And I'm not a Linux guy last
time I checked myself in front of a
52 matches
Mail list logo
