RE: Temp fail not working...

> -Original Message- > From: Jari Fredriksson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, 24 May 2008 12:54 PM > To: Anthony Kamau; users@spamassassin.apache.org > Subject: Re: Temp fail not working... > > Hey! Do not mix options for spamc and spamass-milter! Put all the options > back as

Re: Temp fail not working...

>> >> >> Do you have -x in your call to spamc? >> >> > > Thanks for that. I added that option to the startup script and restarted > spamc (service spamass-milter restart) then killed spamd (service > spamassassin stop). > > Oddly enough, messages are still being delivered by sendmail!!! I t

RE: Temp fail not working...

> -Original Message- > From: Jari Fredriksson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, 23 May 2008 3:29 PM > To: Anthony Kamau; users@spamassassin.apache.org > Subject: Re: Temp fail not working... > > > Do you have -x in your call to spamc? > > Thanks for that. I added that option t

Re: How to get clarity on AWL?

On Friday 23 May 2008 9:42 am, Greg Troxel wrote: > A lot of my mail is tagged with AWL, and I am often baffled. Here are > what I think are the relevent headers from a perplexing example: > > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.4 (2008-01-01) on > fnord

Re: How to get clarity on AWL?

Greg Troxel wrote: A lot of my mail is tagged with AWL, and I am often baffled. Here are what I think are the relevent headers from a perplexing example: Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.4 (2008-01-01) on fnord.ir.bbn.com X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=

Interesting data - but is it good for anything?

I started collecting host names where the registry barrier part of the FCrDNS is the same as the registry barrier part of the helo. I don't know what it's good for - if anything - but looking for ideas as to what to do with it. Just have a gut level feeling that I'm on to something here.

Re: reject vs. delete

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Jared Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > The product I've been working with allows th user to set Rejection and > Deletion thresholds, at which a message identified as spam will be rejected > with "550 - Message is Spam" etc., or accepted with "250 OK" bu

RE: Seeing Bayes token matches for an email

On Fri, 23 May 2008, Bowie Bailey wrote: That gives me the info, now how do I interpret it? [26088] dbg: bayes: token 'fax' => 0.0466125715533146 [26088] dbg: bayes: token 'may' => 0.951423151521604 [26088] dbg: bayes: token 'send' => 0.947622860965791 [26088] dbg: bayes: token 'sen

Re: reject vs. delete

> > Does anyone have any knowledge or opinions on these > matters? Does pretending to accept a message contribute > to the "fight against" spam in some way? Or does it > invite more spam? Is it worth it? > I accept all spam, and then (for higher spamminess automatically) report them thru Sp

RE: Seeing Bayes token matches for an email

Theo Van Dinter wrote: > On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:29:21PM -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote: > > I have an email that does not look at all spammy to me. On an > > account where Bayes is trained manually (no auto-learn at all), it > > got marked with BAYES_99. Is there a way to see what tokens Bayes > >

reject vs. delete

Hi, The product I've been working with allows th user to set Rejection and Deletion thresholds, at which a message identified as spam will be rejected with "550 - Message is Spam" etc., or accepted with "250 OK" but dropped on the floor, respectively. Historically it has been believed that i

Re: Vars for Custom Plugins

Sorry , didn't send tha last email to the list as well/ Doesn't Spamassassin have a standard routine somewhere to deteremine who an email is for? It would seem like pretty basic stuff? Rick On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [sending back to users

Re: Seeing Bayes token matches for an email

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:29:21PM -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote: > I have an email that does not look at all spammy to me. On an account > where Bayes is trained manually (no auto-learn at all), it got marked > with BAYES_99. Is there a way to see what tokens Bayes is keying on? I > tried running i

Re: Spam in qmail queue

On Fri, 23 May 2008, Richard Frovarp wrote: Marcin Praczko wrote: BUT if message is not SPAM - and user doesn't exist, bounce message should be send to sender. Do not bounce! If the user does not exist, reject the message at SMTP time. Problem solved. If you accept the message, it is up t

Seeing Bayes token matches for an email

I could have sworn that there was a way to do this, but I can't find it. I have an email that does not look at all spammy to me. On an account where Bayes is trained manually (no auto-learn at all), it got marked with BAYES_99. Is there a way to see what tokens Bayes is keying on? I tried runn

Re: Spam in qmail queue

>> >> Hi, >> =20 >> I am not sure that I am writing to correct list, but maybe you will help = >> me. >> =20 >> On one of my server qmail has been installed, SpamAssassin and = >> qmail-scanner.=20 >> There is a several virtual domains, and Spam filter is working quite OK. >> =20 >> But I have som

Re: Testing DNSRBLs using SA

DAve wrote: D Hill wrote: To me that rule looks fine. Perhaps your testing is completely within your trusted path? Feed the message with SpamAssassin with the -D debug switch to see for sure. That is how I have been testing it. spamassassin -D < test-mail 2>&1 | grep invaluement No joy, no

Re: Testing DNSRBLs using SA

D Hill wrote: On Fri, 23 May 2008 at 10:32 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] confabulated: Good morning all, I am trying to use SA to test a DNSBL and I am not having any luck getting the rule to hit. I've looked through 20_dnsbl_tests.cf, and read the appropriate section in the docs. http://spamas

Re: Directory Harvest Attack

Jason Holbrook wrote: I am undergoing a massive directory harvest attack. Is there a good set of rules that will help stop this or a place anyone could point me. Assuming you are doing obvious things, like not accepting mail for non-existent users, and using whatever tweaks are available in yo

Re: Testing DNSRBLs using SA

Rob McEwen wrote: DAve wrote: I am trying to use SA to test a DNSBL PLEASE--note that direct queries to the invaluement.com DNSBLs will *always* fail. These are *only* available via RSYNC. So please don't try to add SIP to your RBL list... it won't work!!! (Dave knows this... I'm just men

RE: Testing DNSRBLs using SA

> > I am trying to use SA to test a DNSBL and I am not having any luck > getting the rule to hit. I've looked through 20_dnsbl_tests.cf, and read > the appropriate section in the docs. > > http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.2.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html# > rule_definitions_and_privileged

Re: Testing DNSRBLs using SA

DAve wrote: I am trying to use SA to test a DNSBL PLEASE--note that direct queries to the invaluement.com DNSBLs will *always* fail. These are *only* available via RSYNC. So please don't try to add SIP to your RBL list... it won't work!!! (Dave knows this... I'm just mentioning this for ot

Re: Spam in qmail queue

Marcin Praczko wrote: - Spamassassin marks it as SPAM (which is correct) - But user doesn’t exist on somedomain1.com (it happen) - So qmail is storage this mail in queue as long as it can. Do you have any special reason to receive mail for users that doesn't exist?

Re: Testing DNSRBLs using SA

On Fri, 23 May 2008 at 10:32 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] confabulated: Good morning all, I am trying to use SA to test a DNSBL and I am not having any luck getting the rule to hit. I've looked through 20_dnsbl_tests.cf, and read the appropriate section in the docs. http://spamassassin.apache.o

How to get clarity on AWL?

A lot of my mail is tagged with AWL, and I am often baffled. Here are what I think are the relevent headers from a perplexing example: Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.4 (2008-01-01) on fnord.ir.bbn.com X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=6.8 required=1.0 test

Testing DNSRBLs using SA

Good morning all, I am trying to use SA to test a DNSBL and I am not having any luck getting the rule to hit. I've looked through 20_dnsbl_tests.cf, and read the appropriate section in the docs. http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.2.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#rule_definitions_and_pri

Directory Harvest Attack

I am undergoing a massive directory harvest attack. Is there a good set of rules that will help stop this or a place anyone could point me. Best Regards, Jason Holbrook Chief Technology Integrator / Partner Empower Information Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] weblog.empoweris.com

Re: Spam in qmail queue

Marcin Praczko wrote: - Spamassassin marks it as SPAM (which is correct) - But user doesn’t exist on somedomain1.com (it happen) - So qmail is storage this mail in queue as long as it can. Do you have any special reason to receive mail for users that doesn't exist? M

[OT} Spam in qmail queue

Somebody will send SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] , and: - Spamassassin marks it as SPAM (which is correct) - But user doesn’t exist on somedomain1.com (it happen) - So qmail is storage this mail in queue as long as it can. My question is, what is the best practice and ho

RE: Spam in qmail queue

Marcin Praczko wrote: > Hi, > > I am not sure that I am writing to correct list, but maybe you will > help me. > > On one of my server qmail has been installed, SpamAssassin and > qmail-scanner. > There is a several virtual domains, and Spam filter is working quite > OK. > > But I have some m

Re: Spam in qmail queue

Marcin Praczko wrote: Hi, I am not sure that I am writing to correct list, but maybe you will help me. On one of my server qmail has been installed, SpamAssassin and qmail-scanner. There is a several virtual domains, and Spam filter is working quite OK. But I have some message

Re: Spam in qmail queue

As this really is a qmail question, if you don't get any answers here, I'd suggesting posting to a qmail forum. Marcin Praczko wrote: Hi, I am not sure that I am writing to correct list, but maybe you will help me. On one of my server qmail has been installed, SpamAssassin and qmail-scann

Re: Starting a URIBL - Howto? [OT]

Dallas Engelken wrote: No, you're right, thats not fair. If I compare only recent reactive listings, minus the subdomain hosters that we list, you hit about 60% whereas before it was more like 27%. imvURI stats from last 5000 URIBL black listings -> 2981 hits -> 2019 misses Dallas, I've made

Re: can we make AWL ignore mail from self to self?

Jo Rhett wrote: Lots of users of this host have Windows PCs, Another way to do it would be to use different AWLs, or disabling AWL, for mail from your own users (either authenticated or locally submitted). This makes a lot of sense to me. Have no "my own users" except me ;-) And disablin

Re: Experimental - use my server for your high fake MX record

Marc Perkel wrote: First to do what I'm doing you have to be using EXIM. If you aren't running exim then you just can't do it. In fact, with all due respect, I can't see how anyone can do spam filtering and not use exim as their MTA. qpsmtpd is another viable alternative. Exim has a feature

Spam in qmail queue

Hi, I am not sure that I am writing to correct list, but maybe you will help me. On one of my server qmail has been installed, SpamAssassin and qmail-scanner. There is a several virtual domains, and Spam filter is working quite OK. But I have some message which I am worried about: For exam

Re: How to use private rules?

Michelle Konzack writes: > Am 2008-05-21 10:53:40, schrieb Bob Proulx: > > Michelle Konzack wrote: > > > Because an > > > experience from last Friday where I have hit the limits of my hosting > > > providers mailserver (over 4000 messages stuck in the queue) I lock > > > already the ~/.pro