On Sat, October 21, 2006 06:26, Terry Allen wrote:
if it's an optional extra, can anyone let me know how to
install it or point me to a how-to to get it running successfully
with SA - many thanks for any help with this.
find /etc/mail/spamassassin/ look for any file there ends with pre
the
I've seen a couple different events in my logs where it would appear
the spam was so corrupted that postfix thought it had dozens of
message IDs and went into a cleanup frenzy:
Oct 21 15:40:06 pen postfix/cleanup[13571]: 3965B176A0: message-id=<[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
Oct 21 15:40:06 pen postfix/clean
I got this on my google alerts
Can anyone confirm
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/business/technology/15809465.htm
CHICAGO - A federal judge presiding over a spam dispute rejected a
marketing company's request to suspend the domain name of an anti-spam
group that ignored an $11.7 m
David Baron wrote:
(Virus attachment removed)
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Mail server report.
Date: Saturday 21 October 2006 18:42
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mail server report.
Our firewall determined the e-mails containing worm copies are being sent
On Saturday 14 October 2006 02:24, Lee Manevitch wrote:
> I think I already know the answer to this, but does FuzzyOCR process
> all frames of an animated GIF?
Not out of the box, but it can do if you have a recent version of netpbm
which supports "giftopnm -image=all". There are two calls to gi
On Thu, October 19, 2006 13:41, Matt Kettler wrote:
> Another thing I've been noticing recently.. some idiot has been culling
> the web archives of mailing lists, and is trying to send spam emails to
> MESSAGE ID's of posts I've made. Check your mail logs!
damm don't tell :-)
i have a whole sub
On Sat, October 21, 2006 17:04, Maurice Lucas wrote:
> So one stupid spammer did put smtp before the usernames.
spammer tested if the domain have catch all
now you can "grep User /var/log/maillog" if using postfix :-)
and then block the ip
--
"This message was sent using 100% recycled spam m
Steve Lake raiden.net> writes:
> Yeah, I'm seeing that too. Any ideas on how to do that? For now
> I've been falling back on a procmail hack to toss all messages with
> images embedded in the HTML of the message into their own folder.
I just wrote a little program which
- examinates GIF ani
R Lists06 wrote:
From: Benny Pedersen >
i have changed bayes scores to catch most spam here, and changed threshold
to
learn spam / ham with less range so it more accurate and prevents bayes
poinson on the same time, just have them at scores so spam is still
autolearned, and ham is still autolear
On Friday, October 20, 2006, 9:26:29 PM, Terry Allen wrote:
Hi all,
I'm a long time SA user - my system runs Mac OSX 10.4.x,
running Postfix, Maia Mailguard, ClamAV, Amavisd-new & now
SpamAssassin 3.1.7 since upgrading 4 days ag, the SA installation
intercepts all inbound mail for sc
Is it possible to write a quick rule to catch phone numbers mangled with
[\- *] in between
Like these
1--314--414---4001
If someone is writing phonenumbers this way there is enough reason to
believe he is a spammer
Thanks
Ram
Chris St. Pierre wrote:
I use Postfix and, for a while, I had reject_unknown_hostname as part
of my smtpd_helo_restrictions. For those who aren't familiar,
reject_unknown_hostname will:
Reject the request when the hostname in the client HELO (EHLO) command
has no DNS A or MX record.
This was i
Terry Allen wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm a long time SA user - my system runs Mac OSX 10.4.x, running
> Postfix, Maia Mailguard, ClamAV, Amavisd-new & now SpamAssassin 3.1.7
> since upgrading 4 days ag, the SA installation intercepts all inbound
> mail for scanning prior to delivery.
> Recently,
I had several of them. The first one apparently was the one I forwarded.
The others all got flagged by clamav so the updated signatures must have come
in between the posts.
> Yes, I've gotten that one recently.. It's funny, but it's just another
> virus.
>
> The one I got was missed by all 3 AV pr
JADP - the rfc-ignorant rules lost us some important email today. The customer was throwing away all mail tagged as SPAM after many months of no false positives. I've turned those rules off on my site, and continue as always to encourage my users to check their tagged mail before tossing it.
IMHO
Subject: Need software? Click here.
right click in subject line to see the webpage, with browsers support this :-)
--
"This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails."
Hi
he have a spam file for add to a new SA installation ? for don't start at 0
Thanks for your answer
Hi,
does anybody know if disabling "skip_rbl_checks" does stop razor 2
checks and DCC too even if razor2 and dcc are enabled in local.cf?
Best regards
Volker
Michael Beckmann schrieb:
Greetings!
Hello!
In the past few weeks, I have noticed significant amounts of spam
passing through my filter. It is reaching a level that annoys me. I use
Spamassassin 3.1.7.
I used to get maybe one or two spam messages a day earlier this year
with 200+ spams fi
Do you guys ever get parse() to bail out on a message?
I seem to get that every once in a while.
my $mail = $spamtest->parse($message);
Thanks!
Joe
Steve Lake raiden.net> writes:
> Yeah, I'm seeing that too. Any ideas on how to do that?
I just wrote a little program which
- examines a GIF animation and stores its size
- stores delay time, size, left offset, and top offset of each single picture
- calls gifasm to extract the single pictur
Hello,
I receive some spam today using parts of local newspapers.
Just a mixup from some articals put together so my Bayes won't mark it
as spam.
This is my first time I see spam using local (Dutch) newspapers for
this. Normally it is a English random text.
Am I the only one seeing this or are t
David B Funk wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
Richard Frovarp wrote:
Or for any machine that hosts more domains than has IPs. Even being able
to edit the reverse doesn't mean it will always be the same.
How many different names does your mailserver use in its HELO?
And what mailse
On Friday 20 October 2006 02:53, Angel L. Mateo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am using spamassassin with postfix and amavis on a debian sarge
> server. The versions I use are:
>
> * postfix: 2.1.5
> * amavisd-new
> * spamassassin: 3.1.0a
>
> The problem I have is that emails sent by one of my u
On Sat, October 21, 2006 21:18, Magnus Anderson wrote:
> The Bayes are working, but the AWL are not.
is AWL plugin loaded in ?
> Is there some problem in SA 3.14 for this?
not to what i know of
--
"This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails."
On 2006-10-21, David Baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -- Forwarded Message --
>
> Mail server report.
>
> Our firewall determined the e-mails containing worm copies are being sent
> from your computer.
>
> Nowadays it happens from many computers, because this is a new virus ty
Hello,
We have recently changed our email hosting provider and our new provider
uses SpamAssassin on our mail server. SpamAssassin is being run through
CPanel 10, and when enabling it I receive these configuration details:
--
Attempting to enable SpamAssassin...
X-Spam-Checker-Vers
Hello everyone! :)
Can I get away with this without any memory or resource leaks? Is this OK?
Thanks!
Joe
my $spamtest = Mail::SpamAssassin->new();
my $status = $spamtest->check($s
It's just some bull.
Any good postmaster should know that you will never ever send a return
message now a days when it comes to a virus.
Seen it, and sent it to the round long-time-burning-and-forget storage.
/Micke
David Baron wrote:
(Virus attachment removed)
-- Forwarded Mess
Everytime my SA-Update runs the output from the cron job shows these lines:
Use of uninitialized value in eval "string" at /usr/bin/sa-update line 91.
Use of uninitialized value in eval "string" at /usr/bin/sa-update line 91.
Use of uninitialized value in eval "string" at /usr/bin/sa-update line
On Thu, October 19, 2006 13:19, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
> Any suggestion to spread a spamtrap e-mail address?
just post on a mail list and your email will be scanned by pfishers into there
crap maillists where thay sell all kinds of things, maybe even thay use YOUR
email just for sending out s
Thanks for confirming that :)
"Bowie Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Debbie D wrote:
>> Can someone please remind me how to create custom scores for existing
>> rules?? I do not want to manually go in and change any particular
>> score, any update will over
Mark wrote:
In Pyzor.pm, "internal error" is actually a mask for the infamous error:
"Traceback (most recent call last): ..."
Yeah, there are certain types of input that Pyzor chokes on, like
messages with bogus character encodings. Unfortunately, development
stopped before it was fixed to
I have solved my problem with this.
I used CGPSA v 1.4f and the developer has completed v 1.5 that now
supports MySQL DB for all the user_auto_whitelist data.
--Magnus
I have SpamAssassin-3.1.7 with Postfix MTA on
RHEL 3.0.
I have found following failure message in my
postfix log file. I believe that problem is happened when i updated
Net::DNS perl module from CPAN. Yet SpamAssassin is working perfectly with
postfix MTA without any problem
Oct 23 11:
after running:
sa-update --channel updates.spamassassin.org
and, reading:
% man spamassassin
Default configuration data is loaded from the first existing
directory
in:
/usr/local/spamassassin/var/spamassassin/3.001007
/var/MailServer/Conf
I've been seeing this quite a bit lately, is the site down or do the
timeouts need to be increased? Its currently set for the default 10
seconds.
Oct 21 12:28:03 localhost spamd[19162]: ixhash timeout reached
at /etc/mail/spamassassin/iXhash.pm line 91.
Oct 21 12:28:03 localhost spamd[19162]:
Yes, I've gotten that one recently.. It's funny, but it's just another
virus.
The one I got was missed by all 3 AV products I use (clam, bitdefender,
command). I submitted it to clamav and it's now caught as a variant of
trojan-small.
David Baron wrote:
> (Virus attachment removed)
>
> -
On Thu, October 19, 2006 13:41, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
>> Place it In your signature e.g. on multiple Mailinglists/Forums?
> Well, that way somebody would be tempted to use it.
> You mean, I have to write something like:
> "Plase, do NOT send here: [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> ?
no that will be obivi
> am using CGPro as mail server, and i need some help and advice
> I am planning to implement CGPSA on our ingate servers and am
> not quite sure if it is a good idea
> we recieve almost 7000 email per hour and i don't know if
> spamassassin is going to miss anything
> another question
> for the am
I'm considering filing a lawsuit against Microsoft to try to get an
order to make them make public security updates for Windows to everyone,
registered or not.
The idea is that their product Windows creates a toxic byproduct
(spam,ddos zombies) that interfere with everyone else's internet usag
Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
> JADP - the rfc-ignorant rules lost us some important email today. The
> customer was throwing away all mail tagged as SPAM after many months of
> no false positives. I've turned those rules off on my site, and continue
> as always to encourage my users to check their tag
Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
IMHO if a rule is getting legit email tagged as SPAM it should be toned
down. Obeying the RFC's is a good thing, but I am trying to tune our spam
filter to filter spam, not to be a netcop.
Then you should disable these BLs in your configuration.
Don't suggest to other
Hello,
We have recently changed our email hosting provider and our new provider
uses SpamAssassin on our mail server. SpamAssassin is being run through
CPanel 10, and when enabling it I receive these configuration details:
--
Attempting to enable SpamAssassin...
X-Spam-Checker-Vers
Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
IMHO if a rule is getting legit email tagged as SPAM it should be toned
down. Obeying the RFC's is a good thing, but I am trying to tune our
spam filter to filter spam, not to be a netcop. Our particular contact
seems to have gotten onto rfc-ignorant's list because it
Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm considering filing a lawsuit against Microsoft to try to get an
order to make them make public security updates for Windows to
everyone, registered or not.
The idea is that their product Windows creates a toxic byproduct
(spam,ddos zombies) that interfere with everyone
Hi All,
I’m using:
70_sare_adult.cf
70_sare_specific.cf
70_sare_stocks.cf
What rule set do you suggest for the spoof Paypal and eBay
spam (and assorted fake links to assorted banks and credit unions).
Thanks!
Jon
Duane Hill wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm considering filing a lawsuit against Microsoft to try to get an
order to make them make public security updates for Windows to
everyone, registered or not.
The idea is that their product Windows creates a toxic byproduct
(spam,ddos zombies) that int
Duane Hill schreef:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm considering filing a lawsuit against Microsoft to try to get an
order to make them make public security updates for Windows to
everyone, registered or not.
The idea is that their product Windows creates a toxic byproduct
(spam,ddos zombies) that int
On Monday 23 October 2006 20:34, Marc Perkel took the opportunity to say:
> I'm considering filing a lawsuit against Microsoft to try to get an
> order to make them make public security updates for Windows to everyone,
> registered or not.
I thought they did? At least the message from WU/WGA on on
Marc Perkel wrote:
>
> Duane Hill wrote:
> > Marc Perkel wrote:
> >> I'm considering filing a lawsuit against Microsoft to try to get
an
> >> order to make them make public security updates for Windows to
> >> everyone, registered or not.
> >>
> >> The idea is that their product Windows crea
At 12:35 PM 10/23/2006, you wrote:
My opinion is that security patches should be available to everyone
so as not to create an army of zombies. Aren't OS-X patches openly available?
I believe so.
But then again, there is no product key for OS/X.
It's been a while since I installed OS/X, but
Volker wrote:
Hi,
does anybody know if disabling "skip_rbl_checks" does stop razor 2
checks and DCC too even if razor2 and dcc are enabled in local.cf?
Run spamassassin in debug mode and find out.
Daryl
Holding the position of "most widely-attacked" is no reason for it to also be
"least secure-due-to-widely-known-and-poorly-corrected-issues". Even if
Apple/Posix products were as "widely attacked" as Windows products, the results
would be far less damaging to the global infrastructure, despite P
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Steven Danneman wrote:
> I'm guessing SpamAssassin is misconfigured, unfortunately I don't have
> much access to its configuration, only what is available through
> CPanel. Does anybody have any ideas what could be happening here?
Suggestion:
Use CPanel to set your SA spam
At 06:21 PM 10/20/2006, you wrote:
When we have SpamAssassin enabled, we are unable to receive some
messages. I've narrowed down the problem to any message with the three
characters 'C' 'C' ':' (I've separated them so I can send this message
out) in the body of the message. When any email addr
Jo wrote:
Duane Hill schreef:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm considering filing a lawsuit against Microsoft to try to get an
order to make them make public security updates for Windows to
everyone, registered or not.
The idea is that their product Windows creates a toxic byproduct
(spam,ddos zomb
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
I thought they did? At least the message from WU/WGA on one computer with
Windows XP I used recently was that unauthorised installations only get
critical updates, but they do get those. Is that going to change with Vista?
Yes. See, for instance, http://www.computerworl
On the "walk the way you talk" point, I have edited the DNSBL wiki page
to include a list of all the DNSBLs in 20_dnsbl_tests.cf, instead of the
previous comment about "all of the public DNSBLs" which isn't really true.
This could probably use some more editing, so everyone is encouraged to
fi
Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
JADP - the rfc-ignorant rules lost us some important email today. The
customer was throwing away all mail tagged as SPAM after many months of no
false positives. I've turned those rules off on my site, and continue as
always to encourage my users to check their tagged ma
Peter H. Lemieux wrote:
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
I thought they did? At least the message from WU/WGA on one computer
with Windows XP I used recently was that unauthorised installations
only get critical updates, but they do get those. Is that going to
change with Vista?
Yes. See, for insta
On Monday 23 October 2006 21:58, Peter H. Lemieux took the opportunity to say:
> Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> > I thought they did? At least the message from WU/WGA on one computer with
> > Windows XP I used recently was that unauthorised installations only get
> > critical updates, but they do get tho
But windows patches are free. Even if you are using an illegal copy of
windows, you can still manually download and install the patches. It's
Microsoft Update where they mostly have the genuine windows verification
code. Even Redhat forces you to pay subscriptions for their autoupdate
manageme
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Jon D. Slater wrote:
>What rule set do you suggest for the spoof Paypal and eBay spam (and
>assorted fake links to assorted banks and credit unions).
Jon--
ClamAV blocks a lot of phishing attempts; you might look into that.
Between ClamAV and an aggressive MTA configuration
>>
>>
>> Jo wrote:
>> > Duane Hill schreef:
>> >> Marc Perkel wrote:
>> >>> I'm considering filing a lawsuit against Microsoft to try to get an
>> >>> order to make them make public security updates for Windows to
>> >>> everyone, registered or not.
>> >>>
>> >>> The idea is that their product
>
> ClamAV blocks a lot of phishing attempts; you might look into that.
>
In addition to vanilla ClamAV, I would also suggest adding in the
SANESECURITY unofficial Phishing and Scam signatures for ClamAV. These
are just extra signatures that run in addition to the normal ClamAV
signatures and
I have no official position with spamassassin, but I am requesting that
you please take this thread to another mailing list. It isn't relevant
to spamassassin and we don't need to read this.
--
Jo Rhett
Senior Network Engineer
Network Consonance
I'm running multiple domains on one SPAM cleaning server. I'm wondering if
there's a way in spamassassin to build a separate whitelist for each domain.
If not, can you build a whitelist based on BOTH To and From addresses.
For example let's say that domain xyz.com wants to allow all messages fr
Its not spamassassin, note the x-spam-level: no.
SA didn't block, or attempt to block, or even mark that email spam.
>
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on
> server4.virtuosonetsolutions.com
> X-Spam-Level: *
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.0 required=12.0
> tests=AW
Hello John and Evan,
Thanks for your help. I've tried setting the required_score to 1000,
but any mail with 'C' 'C' ':' is still not coming through.
In addition to not receiving email, I've now tried sending email with
this string in the body through webmail and receive a CPanel error:
Email d
> But Kocoras said Thursday that the requested action was too broad and
> would cut off all lawful online activities of Spamhaus, not just those
> targeted by any court order.
That's not so good, whether confirmed: it would mean that the court recognized
that Spamhaus is actually running some unl
-Original Message-
From: jasonegli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 5:36 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Per Domain Whitelisting
I'm running multiple domains on one SPAM cleaning server. I'm wondering
if
there's a way in spamassassin to build a se
Eric A. Hall wrote:
http://www.ehsco.com/misc/spamassassin/std_compliance.cf might help or
work for what you're doing.
Make sure to read the disclaimers and warnings
Those helped a lot. There's only three checks I can't do with them
(probably need to use a plugin for it):
a) does the hos
On Monday, October 23, 2006, 5:11:43 PM, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
GT> That's not so good, whether confirmed: it would mean that the
GT> court recognized that Spamhaus is actually running some
GT> unlawful ...
No, it only means that Spamhaus abandoned the case and allowed a
default judgment and
> GT> That's not so good, whether confirmed: it would mean that the
> GT> court recognized that Spamhaus is actually running some
> GT> unlawful ...
>
> No, it only means that Spamhaus abandoned the case and allowed a
> default judgment and injunction to be entered against it.
>
> A default judgm
> -Original Message-
> From: Noc Phibee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 12:46 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Bayes ?
>
>
> Hi
>
> he have a spam file for add to a new SA installation ? for
> don't start at 0
>
> Thanks for your answer
>
On Monday, October 23, 2006, 7:07:43 PM, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
GT> I would have much more preferred a statement like: 'we can't
GT> handle this case since it crosses U.S. borders', but
GT> anyway...
Me too, but because Spamhaus did not ask that the case be dismissed
for lack of personal jur
Oct 23 17:19:09 espphotography spamd[7320]: (?:(?<=[\s,]))* matches
null string many times in regex; marked by <-- HERE in
m/\G(?:(?<=[\s,]))* <-- HERE \Z/ at
/opt/local/lib/perl5/5.8.7/Text/Wrap.pm line 46.\n
Any ideas what's causing this?
Coming up pretty frequently in my mail.log.
SA 3
Robert Braver wrote:
On Monday, October 23, 2006, 7:07:43 PM, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
GT> I would have much more preferred a statement like: 'we can't
GT> handle this case since it crosses U.S. borders', but
GT> anyway...
Me too, but because Spamhaus did not ask that the case be dismissed
On Monday, October 23, 2006, 7:52:56 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
MP> The judge should have raised the issue sua sponte. (of his own motion)
While the court can decide, sua sponta, that it doesn't have subject
matter jurisdiction, I don't believe it can do that with regards to
personal jurisdiction (un
Howdy,
I run SA-3.1.7 from MailScanner, on CentOS-4.4
When I run 'maiscanner --lint' it says SA has an error. Output follows:
---
Connected to SpamAssassin cache database
config: warning: score set for non-existent rule RCVD_IN_XBL
config: warning: score set for non-existent rule RCVD_IN_NJABL_S
Robert Braver wrote:
On Monday, October 23, 2006, 7:52:56 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
MP> The judge should have raised the issue sua sponte. (of his own motion)
While the court can decide, sua sponta, that it doesn't have subject
matter jurisdiction, I don't believe it can do that with regards to
On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 05:43:30PM -0700, Evan Platt wrote:
> null string many times in regex; marked by <-- HERE in
> m/\G(?:(?<=[\s,]))* <-- HERE \Z/ at
> /opt/local/lib/perl5/5.8.7/Text/Wrap.pm line 46.\n
>
> Any ideas what's causing this?
Bug in Text::Wrap.
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAss
On 10/23/2006 7:01 PM, John Rudd wrote:
> Eric A. Hall wrote:
>> http://www.ehsco.com/misc/spamassassin/std_compliance.cf might help or
>> work for what you're doing.
>>
>> Make sure to read the disclaimers and warnings
>
> Those helped a lot. There's only three checks I can't do with them
> (p
Eric A. Hall wrote:
On 10/23/2006 7:01 PM, John Rudd wrote:
Eric A. Hall wrote:
http://www.ehsco.com/misc/spamassassin/std_compliance.cf might help or
work for what you're doing.
Make sure to read the disclaimers and warnings
Those helped a lot. There's only three checks I can't do with them
On Monday 23 October 2006 11:17, Duane Hill wrote:
> As it is now, Windows is the most widely used platform at
> present. That is the reason it is the most widely attacked.
Ah, someone else who has drunk the cool-aid poured by
Ballmer and Gates.
Windows is attacked because its EASY, not necessar
Jo Rhett wrote:
> On the "walk the way you talk" point, I have edited the DNSBL wiki
> page to include a list of all the DNSBLs in 20_dnsbl_tests.cf, instead
> of the previous comment about "all of the public DNSBLs" which isn't
> really true.
>
> This could probably use some more editing, so every
John Rudd wrote:
> Eric A. Hall wrote:
>> On 10/23/2006 7:01 PM, John Rudd wrote:
>>> Eric A. Hall wrote:
http://www.ehsco.com/misc/spamassassin/std_compliance.cf might help or
work for what you're doing.
Make sure to read the disclaimers and warnings
>>> Those helped a lot. Th
Hi,
Spam assassin has for a long time been picking up e-mails with content
like the following (I have changed a few letters to prevent Bayesian
stuff from picking it up), but it's always based on URIs, HTML structure
and such, rather than on a plain text match on the body.
V LOST P
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
> David B Funk wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
> >
> >> Richard Frovarp wrote:
> >>> Or for any machine that hosts more domains than has IPs. Even being able
> >>> to edit the reverse doesn't mean it will always be the same.
> >> How many differ
Hi all,
Version:
3.1.4
OS - Unslung 6.8 on a Linksys
NSLU2 (Slug)
Running spamd with fetchmail
and postfix
A couple of days ago the Slug
hung with masses of disk activity; when I looked at what was going on, it seemd
that spamd and/or spamc were chewing up resources.
Looking at the spam
James Lavery wrote:
Hi all,
Version: 3.1.4
OS - Unslung 6.8 on a Linksys NSLU2 (Slug)
Running spamd with fetchmail and postfix
How much memory do one of those things have?
A couple of days ago the Slug hung with masses of disk activity; when I
looked at what was going on, it seemd that spamd
Hi all,
I´m newbee to Spamassassin
I´ve install Spamassassin 3.1.5 a some spam are§not marked as a spam.
Whatś wrong in my settings of spamassassin
Especially this header:
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.5 (2006-08-29) on fw.muvalmez.cz
X-Spam-Status: No,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I´m newbee to Spamassassin
I´ve install Spamassassin 3.1.5 a some spam are§not marked as a spam.
Whatś wrong in my settings of spamassassin
Especially this header:
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.5 (2006-08-29) on fw.muva
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I´m newbee to Spamassassin
I´ve install Spamassassin 3.1.5 a some spam are§not marked as a spam.
Whatś wrong in my settings of spamassassin
Especially this header:
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.5 (2006-08-29) on fw.muva
Chris schrieb:
I've been seeing this quite a bit lately, is the site down or do the
timeouts need to be increased? Its currently set for the default 10
seconds.
Oct 21 12:28:03 localhost spamd[19162]: ixhash timeout reached
at /etc/mail/spamassassin/iXhash.pm line 91.
Oct 21 12:28:03 localh
96 matches
Mail list logo
