On 03.07.08 17:58, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> Jo Rhett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 3, 2008, at 12:14 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> Please, don't send private replies, I did not ask for
> them.
> >>
> >> On 02.07.08 21:32, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
> >>> Its impossible to know
On 04.07.08 08:34, Philippe Couas wrote:
> I wante use procmail with spamassassin and put into an spécial directory
> spammed mail.
> But, how could i read theses mail ? do i need to create an special account
> for each user or not ?
I put my spams into _folder_ named "spam" and can read it using
I just found out one of those sites, seemed to be extremely useful. It gives
real life examples and elaborates how rules have affected the eventual SA
scores.
http://markmail.org/
If there any other websites similar or even better than this?
On 04.07.08 17:25, NGSS wrote:
> I just found out one of those sites, seemed to be extremely useful. It gives
> real life examples and elaborates how rules have affected the eventual SA
> scores.
is this spam? The formulation above indicates that.
> http://markmail.org/
"MarkMail is a free serv
With this in mind it started to look like a perl issue:
> I have just spotted the line: "No /usr/bin/perl found"
So I checked:
-rwxr-xr-x 2 root root 1.1M 2007-12-04 09:18 perl
-rwxr-xr-x 2 root root 1.1M 2007-12-04 09:18 perl5.8.8
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 37K 2007-12-04 09:
Richard Johnson schrieb am 03.07.2008 10:58:
check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan! at
/usr/share/perl5/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm line 164.
[9086] dbg: ignore: using a test message to lint rules
[9086] dbg: config: using "/etc/spamassassin" for site rules pre fi
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 12:39 +0200, Alex Woick wrote:
> Richard Johnson schrieb am 03.07.2008 10:58:
>
> > check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan! at
> > /usr/share/perl5/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm line 164.
>
> > [9086] dbg: ignore: using a test message to lint rule
On 3 Jul 2008, at 22:06, Marc Perkel wrote:
You can't spoof Forward Confirmed rDNS.
But you can't stop $bigcorporations PCs getting compromised either
And I really love the way you completely ignored my example of
gmail.com
You may have good intentions, but your idea is seriously
On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 12:38:49PM +0100, Michele Neylon wrote:
>
> On 3 Jul 2008, at 22:06, Marc Perkel wrote:
>>>
>>
>> You can't spoof Forward Confirmed rDNS.
>
> But you can't stop $bigcorporations PCs getting compromised either
>
> And I really love the way you completely ignored my example of
Richard Johnson wrote:
Stopping SpamAssassin Mail Filter Daemon: No /usr/bin/perl found
running; none killed.
spamd.
I have just spotted the line: "No /usr/bin/perl found"
It didn't just say that.
It said "No /usr/bin/perl found running; none killed.", wich has
a very different meaning.
On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 11:12 +0200, Helmut Schneider wrote:
I would like to do some whitelisting for an external mailing list. I
found
"whitelist_from" and "whitelist_auth" but they automatically score -100.
Is
there a way to use whitelist_* or something similiar with a custom score?
amavisd-n
> You can't spoof Forward Confirmed rDNS.
If we could find registrar of domain then I can write a rule
if( Expensive_registrar && Not_spoofed && Not_freemail ) we can give
a negative score I would not like to whitelist the entire stuff though
That means I would have to maintain a list of
Richard Johnson schrieb am 04.07.2008 06:35:
I then reinstall:
apt-get install spamassassin
[...]
Suggested packages:
razor libnet-ident-perl libio-socket-ssl-perl pyzor libmail-dkim-perl
Recommended packages:
spamc re2c libsys-syslog-perl
The following NEW packages will be installed
spam
Heya,
wondering if somone got a rule for those.
For me it's too low volume to care.
see attached mail.
The sender isn't on any BL yet (might be in a few hours) , but the URL is
already on uribl.com. SA doesn't detect the "obfuscation" unfortunatly.
The bayes poison begins to be very common, so i
Matus UHLAR - fantomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> > > He is acted as is common and expected.
>
> No, people are expected to keep discussions on the list. Sending private
> copies may result in discussing off-the-list.
True. So reply-all leads to mail on-list (notwithstanding the mail s
Arvid Ephraim Picciani wrote:
Heya,
wondering if somone got a rule for those.
For me it's too low volume to care.
see attached mail.
The sender isn't on any BL yet (might be in a few hours) , but the URL is
already on uribl.com. SA doesn't detect the "obfuscation" unfortunatly.
The bayes poiso
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 16:47 +0200, Alex Woick wrote:
> Richard Johnson schrieb am 04.07.2008 06:35:
> > I then reinstall:
> > apt-get install spamassassin
> [...]
> > Suggested packages:
> > razor libnet-ident-perl libio-socket-ssl-perl pyzor libmail-dkim-perl
> > Recommended packages:
> > spa
>
> I'm sorry, but what MUA recognizes those? Why don' t you set Reply-
> To: which will be honored by all MUAs?
>
snip
>
>
> He is acted as is common and expected. Others who, like you, don't
> want private copies set Reply-To.
>
> --
> Jo Rhett
> Net Consonance : consonant endings by net
Robert - elists wrote:
[snip]
I don't get why the list software doesn't take care of this so we never have
this issue.
This has been debated to death here and elsewhere. please search the
archives and/or google before bringing this religious debate again.
Isn't one of the people that admin
At 10:34 04-07-2008, Robert - elists wrote:
I don't get why the list software doesn't take care of this so we never have
this issue.
It's a question of choice. If the list software takes care of it,
then the MUA cannot set a preference. There is a tendency to "fix"
list software for the fai
mouss writes:
> Please let's kill this thread.
> - Matus and few others will keep shouting when people send them private
> copies.
> - The rest of us don't care
> - Earth will keep turing...
+1
--j.
On Fre, 2008-07-04 at 10:34 -0700, Robert - elists wrote:
[]
> h
>
> I don't get why the list software doesn't take care of this so we never have
> this issue.
Because it's a decision of the mail sender (read: you and me) if he
wants a private copy (additionally to the public one over the
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 16:47 +0200, Alex Woick wrote:
> Richard Johnson schrieb am 04.07.2008 06:35:
> > I then reinstall:
> > apt-get install spamassassin
> [...]
> > Suggested packages:
> > razor libnet-ident-perl libio-socket-ssl-perl pyzor libmail-dkim-perl
> > Recommended packages:
> > spa
23 matches
Mail list logo
