On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 19:48 -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
> ram wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > In my local.cf I have
> >
> > --
> > score USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST -100
> >
> > priority USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST -1000
> > priority RCVD_IN_XBL -800
> >
> >
> > shortcircuit USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST on
> > sh
Benny Pedersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, June 26, 2008 18:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Thanks for everyone's tips..
>
> tips will stop from me when you cc me and post on maillist
No big deal; use Procmail to suppress double-delivery instead of getting your
panties in a twist.
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu, June 26, 2008 04:40, Matt Kettler wrote:
I'll attempt to do so. Didn't realize you disliked it.
its like asking 2 times for the same answer and wonder why no answer
Well then set a Reply-to header to point to the list when you post
here... That's what
On Fri, June 27, 2008 04:28, Rubin Bennett wrote:
> ?People and their delicate egos...
> *grumble*
smile :)
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.0-4.1mdv2008.1
another mua is found brokken
--
Benny Pedersen
Need more webspace ? http://www.servage.net/?coupon=cust37098
Fer the love of Pete guys, take this offline. This has *nothing* to do
with SpamAssassin other than making me wish my system would toss this
whole damn thread.
People and their delicate egos...
*grumble*
Rubin
On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 04:13 +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On Fri, June 27, 2008 03:
On Fri, June 27, 2008 03:09, Jo Rhett wrote:
> Personal attacks are not relevant to the topic.
hmm
AppleMail is the only mua i have seen that cant make a reply to maillist
without sending cc
you talk like its my problem right ?
is AppleMail the only option you have ?
if i had to use such bad
On Jun 26, 2008, at 7:01 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu, June 26, 2008 23:09, Larry Nedry wrote:
Benny, you might want to read the docs:
docs needs updating, all test i have done is showing this is not
working
so here
Hmmm then you are running a faulty or modified version I guess,
Dave, what are you complaining about? This thread went sideways
without my involvement. I was replying to someone else's query about
Benny's mail servers sending back random SPF failure backscatter
messages.
On Jun 26, 2008, at 5:22 PM, Dave Koontz wrote:
Jo, didn't you get your answer se
On Jun 26, 2008, at 5:43 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
and you are a constant ignorant sending me cc
get a life
Personal attacks are not relevant to the topic.
Sending someone a CC to a message they sent, and to which their mail
headers sets reply-to, is only a problem in Bennys mind. But he
On Fri, June 27, 2008 02:08, Jo Rhett wrote:
> I'm sorry, but you're a constant source of backscatter, Benny.
and you are a constant ignorant sending me cc
get a life
--
Benny Pedersen
Need more webspace ? http://www.servage.net/?coupon=cust37098
On Jun 25, 2008, at 6:34 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
then stop cc me
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0
tests=FM_FAKE_HELO_VERIZON,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
designates 206.46.173.3 as permitted sender)
Re
On Thu, June 26, 2008 23:09, Larry Nedry wrote:
> Benny, you might want to read the docs:
docs needs updating, all test i have done is showing this is not working
so here
--
Benny Pedersen
Need more webspace ? http://www.servage.net/?coupon=cust37098
ram wrote:
Hi
In my local.cf I have
--
score USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST -100
priority USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST -1000
priority RCVD_IN_XBL -800
shortcircuit USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST on
shortcircuit RCVD_IN_XBL spam
--
So I expect RCVD_IN_XBL to be evaluated after USER_IN_SPF_WHI
On Donnerstag, 26. Juni 2008 Florian Lindner wrote:
> Can I use two different bayes DBs? One for my family without training
> (just the auto train functions) and one for me that is trained?
You don't want that, really. If you use a trained bayes, it helps all.
You do not have to have all spam t
On Jun 26, 2008, at 4:09 PM, Larry Nedry wrote:
On 6/26/08 at 7:05 PM +0200 Benny Pedersen wrote:
make priority positive not negative, default all have 0 to start
with, and
10 would be tested before 0 :-)
And again on 6/26/08 at 10:06 PM +0200 Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu, June 26, 20
On 6/26/08 at 7:05 PM +0200 Benny Pedersen wrote:
>make priority positive not negative, default all have 0 to start with, and
>10 would be tested before 0 :-)
And again on 6/26/08 at 10:06 PM +0200 Benny Pedersen wrote:
>On Thu, June 26, 2008 21:17, Michael Parker wrote:
>> Negative numbers co
On Thu, June 26, 2008 21:17, Michael Parker wrote:
> That is not correct.
so then sagrey is brokken
> Negative numbers come before positive numbers.
nope
order is positive to negative
you might find it is correct by testing more :)
--
Benny Pedersen
Need more webspace ? http://www.servage
On Jun 26, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu, June 26, 2008 17:13, ram wrote:
How do I enforce SA to wait for results negative short circuited
rules
of higher priority before shorcicuiting mail as spam due to positive
ones
make priority positive not negative, default all h
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Florian Lindner wrote:
Generally speaking, it's a bad idea to fiddle with the threshold as all the
base rulesets are scored by the masscheck process with the assumption that
5 is "spammy".
Sorry, I don't understand this. What is difference between changing the
threshold
Am 26.06.2008 um 19:31 schrieb John Hardin:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Florian Lindner wrote:
Am 26.06.2008 um 18:26 schrieb John Hardin:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Florian Lindner wrote:
> Hello,
> I use (honestly: I plan) the following procedure to filter my
spam using > SA:
> > All mails are pipe
On Thu, June 26, 2008 16:39, Jost Krieger wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 01:02:18AM +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> On Wed, June 25, 2008 23:39, Bob Proulx wrote:
>> > By what method did you recieve that URL?
>> dsn bounce
> Could you send the whole DSN, please?
i deleted it, but see the opensp
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Florian Lindner wrote:
Am 26.06.2008 um 18:26 schrieb John Hardin:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Florian Lindner wrote:
> Hello,
> I use (honestly: I plan) the following procedure to filter my spam using
> SA:
>
> All mails are piped through spamc. (emails for my family and me)
On Thu, June 26, 2008 18:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks for everyone's tips..
tips will stop from me when you cc me and post on maillist
> Stupid question:
there is only stupid answers
> what is the difference between whitelist_auth and def_whitelist_auth?
2 diff scores
--
Benny Pe
Am 26.06.2008 um 18:26 schrieb John Hardin:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Florian Lindner wrote:
Hello,
I use (honestly: I plan) the following procedure to filter my spam
using SA:
All mails are piped through spamc. (emails for my family and me).
required_score is set to high value of 9 to avoid
Benny Pedersen wrote:
can you change it to list reverse, so freemail domains is all other then
what is not freemail domain ?
this is imho more simple to knwo where to pay for email then to know with
domains is free :-)
So... every time someone registers a new domain name for their start-up
co
On Thu, June 26, 2008 17:13, ram wrote:
> How do I enforce SA to wait for results negative short circuited rules
> of higher priority before shorcicuiting mail as spam due to positive
> ones
make priority positive not negative, default all have 0 to start with, and
10 would be tested before
On Thu, June 26, 2008 16:24, McDonald, Dan wrote:
> I use amavisd-new, so for me it is as
> simple as removing the domain from @local_domains_maps
> in /etc/amavisd/amavisd.conf
spamassassin is still running spamtest with that, if one really like to
destingt domains from each other make a policy
Thanks for everyone's tips.. Stupid question: what is the difference
between whitelist_auth and def_whitelist_auth?
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Mon, June 23, 2008 08:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] bsaa42453.tk.mesh.ad.jp
def_whiteli
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Florian Lindner wrote:
Hello,
I use (honestly: I plan) the following procedure to filter my spam using SA:
All mails are piped through spamc. (emails for my family and me).
required_score is set to high value of 9 to avoid false postives. Mail which
is detected as spam is
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 01:02:18AM +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>
> On Wed, June 25, 2008 23:39, Bob Proulx wrote:
>
> > By what method did you recieve that URL?
>
> dsn bounce
Could you send the whole DSN, please?
My guess is someone's mail setup on this list is re-routing mails by Header
"To
Hi to all,
I have just set up a new server with postfix and spamassassin.
Spamassassin works fine but when I look at my mail.log I can see lots of
errors.
For every mail spamassassin scans, I get the message:
---
Hello,
I use (honestly: I plan) the following procedure to filter my spam
using SA:
All mails are piped through spamc. (emails for my family and me).
required_score is set to high value of 9 to avoid false postives. Mail
which is detected as spam is being deleted.
All SA filtering is don
Hi
In my local.cf I have
--
score USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST -100
priority USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST -1000
priority RCVD_IN_XBL -800
shortcircuit USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST on
shortcircuit RCVD_IN_XBL spam
--
So I expect RCVD_IN_XBL to be evaluated after USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST ,
but
On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 07:13 -0700, raulbe wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Is there a way to disable Spam Assassin for just one virtual domain?
> Im on a centos 4.x box
Yes.
Oh, your real question was "how do I" Well, that depends on how you
have integrated spamassassin. I use amavisd-new, so for me
Hi all,
Is there a way to disable Spam Assassin for just one virtual domain?
Im on a centos 4.x box
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/diasble-for-virtual-domain-tp18134873p18134873.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> That option wasn't removed from SA.. it was removed from the main conf
> docs, as all of the AWL is now a plugin. That option is documented in the
> docs for the AWL plugin, which is where it really belongs. (if the option
> isn't valid without the plugin, then it in theory shouldn't be in the ma
Florian Lindner wrote:
Hello,
I have installed DCC and I think it should be working:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ spamassassin -D < junk 2>&1 | grep -i DCC
[7227] dbg: config: read file /usr/share/spamassassin/25_dcc.cf
[7227] dbg: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DCC from @INC
[7227] dbg: dc
On 26.06.08 13:35, Florian Lindner wrote:
> I have installed DCC and I think it should be working:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ spamassassin -D < junk 2>&1 | grep -i DCC
> [7227] dbg: config: read file /usr/share/spamassassin/25_dcc.cf
> [7227] dbg: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DCC from
Hello,
I have installed DCC and I think it should be working:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ spamassassin -D < junk 2>&1 | grep -i DCC
[7227] dbg: config: read file /usr/share/spamassassin/25_dcc.cf
[7227] dbg: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DCC from @INC
[7227] dbg: dcc: network tests on, reg
> Benny Pedersen wrote:
> >On Fredag, 20/6 2008, 10:04, Henrik K wrote:
> >
> >>On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 12:12:45AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
> >>
> >>>That is correct, SPF checks are applied to the first untrusted host.
> >>>
> >>Matt, you should know better. ;) It's first _external_ h
On Dienstag, 24. Juni 2008 ram wrote:
> Since Last week spams are at 50% of what
> they used to be last month. Is this what you all are seeing
We've had a high at beginnin of June, and now we're very low in spam
volume. Maybe "they" prepare a new burst for the holidays? Or they know
spamming in
41 matches
Mail list logo
