Hi,
I've installed qmail+clamav+SA from qmailrocks. I would like to change the
require score for SA in local.cf and build the scanner file again. However,
SA doesn't take the new changes from local.cf everytime i restarted the SA
and qmail.
Any help available?
--
View this message in context:
Well, I don't know who 'we' is but I know the author quite well, no
wonder since it's me ;-)
Go ahead an add a new code section to the wiki. (There are versions vor
3.0 and 3.1.x, yours would be for 3.1.3). In any case keep the other code.
Testers are always welcome. What would interest me is y
>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Paul Dudley wrote:
>>
>> > If we decide to reject low grade spam messages rather than
>> > quarantine them, is it possible to add text to the body of the
>> > rejection message?
>>
>> Rejecting (bouncing) spam is utterly pointless, as 99% of it will have
>> forged sender i
"John D. Hardin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 12/07/2006 02:16:49 PM:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Paul Dudley wrote:
>
> > If we decide to reject low grade spam messages rather than
> > quarantine them, is it possible to add text to the body of the
> > rejection message?
>
> Rejecting (bouncing) spam
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Paul Dudley wrote:
> If we decide to reject low grade spam messages rather than
> quarantine them, is it possible to add text to the body of the
> rejection message?
Rejecting (bouncing) spam is utterly pointless, as 99% of it will have
forged sender information. You will eit
Randall Perry wrote:
> I recently updated to the latest SA and at the same time converted bayes
> from file db to PostgreSQL.
>
> I notice that using sa-learn with SQL now is very slow compared to file db.
> Is this normal, and is accessing the db while scanning mail any slower with
> SQL?
>
>
We are using SA 3.0.4.
If we decide to reject low grade spam messages rather than quarantine
them, is it possible to add text to the body of the rejection message?
Paul Dudley
ANL IT Operations Dept.
ANL Container Line
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ANL DISCLAIMER
This e-mail and any file attached is
Mididoc Productions wrote:
> Hello,
>
> my name is mike roland.
> i'm not a unix expert.
>
> we have a vps server with for virtual host domains.
> everything is working fine so far:
> the webs are accessible the mails can be sent and received.
>
> but we want to install a blacklist to refuse emails
Looking at the code for that page, the guy probably couldn't avoid the ad.
He's (surprise!) using an unregistered trial version of the web page maker.
It appears to insert the ad at the bottom of any web page created, and also
inserts a tracking link off to a specific usercode at some site.
The link below takes you to a fake paypal site with a link at the bottom of
the page to the software used to create the site, not too smart.
www.nationwide.saveitfree.com
--
Chris
Registered Linux User 283774 http://counter.li.org
20:32:50 up 1 day, 18:37, 1 user, load average: 0.41, 0.35, 0.29
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Further, I don't know why it even uses it's own DNS resolver. It
would make much more sense to use SA's and do all this in the background.
I'm just assuming that the original author wasn't aware of it's
existence or w
Alexander Piavka wrote:
What is the difference between the check_rbl* and check_uridnsbl* tests.
They seem to be made for the same purpose?
check_rbl* tests look at the IP addresses of the systems that sent the
mail -- basically, what shows up in the Received: lines once they get
out of your
Did you try it also in the in the user_prefs file?
Whate kind of instal did you made sitewide or per user?
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/blacklist-tf1927346.html#a5279182
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users forum at Nabble.com.
On 7/11/2006 6:10 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Daryl C. W. O'Shea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.11.2356 +0200]:
If the host that adds the auth line in the received header is trusted
then the authenticated client will also be trusted.
See the third case here: http://wiki.apache.org/sp
What is the difference between the check_rbl* and check_uridnsbl* tests.
They seem to be made for the same purpose?
Thanks.
also sprach Daryl C. W. O'Shea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.11.2356 +0200]:
> If the host that adds the auth line in the received header is trusted
> then the authenticated client will also be trusted.
>
> See the third case here: http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DynablockIssues
Okay, so the
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Daryl C. W. O'Shea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.11.0432 +0200]:
For those using Postfix, bug 4980 has a patch to support the auth
headers, available in Postfix 2.3 and later, that can be used to extend
your trust path to authenticated users.
http://issues.ap
What is the difference between the check_rbl* and check_uridnsbl* tests.
They seem to be made for the same purpose?
Thanks.
Hello,
my name is mike roland.
i'm not a unix expert.
we have a vps server with for virtual host domains.
everything is working fine so far:
the webs are accessible the mails can be sent and received.
but we want to install a blacklist to refuse emails from certain
email-addresses for the whole
Hi , i'd like to know if its possbile and how, to ignore specific rule
scores (like ALL_TRUSTED) then calculating the autolearn threshold for
spam and ham?
Thanks
I recently updated to the latest SA and at the same time converted bayes
from file db to PostgreSQL.
I notice that using sa-learn with SQL now is very slow compared to file db.
Is this normal, and is accessing the db while scanning mail any slower with
SQL?
--
Randall Perry
sysTame
Xserve Web
Justin Mason wrote:
There's an interesting discussion on my weblog at
http://taint.org/2006/07/07/184022a.html , regarding the
recently-contributed "trie" and Aho-Corasick regexp optimizations, which
have been added to perl 5.9.x.
These could provide a way to get *serious* speedups in SpamAssass
On 7/11/06, Nicholas Payne-Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Does anybody know a good way to script sa-learn to daily check on junk
e-mail folders?
I use logrotate because it handles automatically removing or renaming
the files after learning, but I don't use maildir-format folders so I
can't
Pezhman Lali wrote:
> hi
> how can i enable logging in spamassassin?
> where will be saved?
If you're using the spamd/spamc pair, spamd will by default send log
messages to your syslog daemon. The "spamassassin" command line script
does not support logging, but it's really slow and inefficient anyw
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 12:13:22PM +0100, Chris Lear wrote:
> >Does anybody know a good way to script sa-learn to daily check on junk
> >e-mail folders? i'm currently trying the following line in a cron.daily
> >script, but its throwing up an error:
> >
> >find /home/vpopmail/domains -name ".Junk
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 05:38:22AM -0700, Pezhman Lali wrote:
> in my /var/log/maillog, foreach spam checking, there is these 4 lines
> Jul 11 08:22:50 DSG spamd[1286]: spamd: connection from localhost
> [127.0.0.1] at port 45158
> 12101 Jul 11 08:22:50 DSG spamd[1286]: spamd: processing message
Obantec Support wrote:
>
> currently i run SA3.0.0 on FC3 with stock perl 5.8.5 and sendmail
> 8.13.x
>
> should i upgrade to the 3.1 path or continue on the 3.0 path
Go with 3.1 unless you have some reason for staying with 3.0. Read
the upgrade docs first to catch any changes in the configura
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
> On 7/10/2006 9:57 PM, Gino Cerullo wrote:
> >
> > On 10-Jul-06, at 9:16 PM, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
> >
> > Snip, snip and more snip.
and even more snip...
> > Since SA is being called by Amavisd-new shouldn't the changes to
> > ignore authenticated user happen th
hi
in my /var/log/maillog, foreach spam checking, there is these 4 lines
Jul 11 08:22:50 DSG spamd[1286]: spamd: connection from localhost [127.0.0.1] at port 45158
12101 Jul 11 08:22:50 DSG spamd[1286]: spamd: processing message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for mail:200
12102 Jul 11 08:23:00 DSG spamd
There's an interesting discussion on my weblog at
http://taint.org/2006/07/07/184022a.html , regarding the
recently-contributed "trie" and Aho-Corasick regexp optimizations, which
have been added to perl 5.9.x.
These could provide a way to get *serious* speedups in SpamAssassin.
If anyone is inte
This can happen if there is contention for the Bayes db.
Try running spamd with "-D" and compare output from that.
--j.
Jeremy Kister writes:
> I have an odd problem where given the /same/ input spamd, bayes will be
> triggered sometimes, and not others. I cannot replicate the problem
> send
Thats fantastic, thanks very much Chris!
Chris Lear wrote:
* Nicholas Payne-Roberts wrote (11/07/06 11:58):
Does anybody know a good way to script sa-learn to daily check on
junk e-mail folders? i'm currently trying the following line in a
cron.daily script, but its throwing up an error:
fi
hello
let me know ,which SA log Analyzer is better, with more details?
thanks
Pezhman
I was entertained by this. A score of 5.491 added to an e-mail because
of a Yahoo! advert stuck on the bottom by the Yahoo! MTA.
And the advert is for SpamGuard.
[... headers chopped... ]
X-Spam-Score: 2.9
X-Spam-Level: ++
X-Spam-Report: Spam report: Score = 2.9.
Tests=BAYES_00=-2.599,DRUGS_ER
* Nicholas Payne-Roberts wrote (11/07/06 11:58):
Does anybody know a good way to script sa-learn to daily check on junk
e-mail folders? i'm currently trying the following line in a cron.daily
script, but its throwing up an error:
find /home/vpopmail/domains -name ".Junk E-mail" -exec sa-learn
hi
how can i enable logging in spamassassin?
where will be saved?
best
Pezhman
Does anybody know a good way to script sa-learn to daily check on junk
e-mail folders? i'm currently trying the following line in a cron.daily
script, but its throwing up an error:
find /home/vpopmail/domains -name ".Junk E-mail" -exec sa-learn
--showdots --spam cur {} \;
Error:
Learned to
Hi
currently i run SA3.0.0 on FC3 with stock perl 5.8.5 and sendmail 8.13.x
should i upgrade to the 3.1 path or continue on the 3.0 path
Mark
also sprach Daryl C. W. O'Shea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.11.0432 +0200]:
> For those using Postfix, bug 4980 has a patch to support the auth
> headers, available in Postfix 2.3 and later, that can be used to extend
> your trust path to authenticated users.
>
> http://issues.apache.org/SpamAss
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
So... fixing the above will resolve your SPF (and other) issues for LAN
users. Add all the IP space you control to trusted networks (including
your internal RFC 1938 ranges).
I just woke up and said, why'd I write that! I of course meant RFC 1918
addresses. I did
40 matches
Mail list logo
