Hello
I am doing a master's thesis about DKIM deployment. I am now gathering
statistics and wondering if someone, who has DKIM validation
activated, would like to share their mail log?
The statistics is created with a modified version of MailGraph and
will show the numbers of signed, signed and v
Hello,
thanks for your sugesstions.
spamassassin works in commad line so I think it isn`t syntax problem of the
config file. I restarted server. I updated SpamAssassin to verison 3.2.4.
The spamd doesn`t work. I`m not spamassassin specialist. Maybe it`s a bug.
Matt Kettler-3 wrote:
>
> mezcal
On 12.08.08 14:57, Jimmy Stewpot wrote:
> I currently use the SARE rules database for my incoming spam detection
> and prevention. Over recent months I have begun to see a big increase in
> the number of spams. I am interested to know if there are any
> alternatives to SARE for an external list
Hi - I have a server (mail & web) set up with spamassassin 3.1.9 installed
with postfix 2.45 on Red Hat 4.1.2-13 kernel 2.6.22.14-72.fc6
3 users of the server I manage are having all incoming emails bounced with
the following:
temporary failure. Command output: procmail: Program failure (-25) o
mezcal wrote:
Hello,
thanks for your sugesstions.
spamassassin works in commad line so I think it isn`t syntax problem of the
config file. I restarted server. I updated SpamAssassin to verison 3.2.4.
The spamd doesn`t work. I`m not spamassassin specialist. Maybe it`s a bug.
Well, if "spam
/etc/postxix/main had mailbox_size_limit set to 11 megs - can't believe this
is the default! All 3 users are on holiday, so this is the first time this
limit had been reached...
upped it to half a gig and now the mail is getting through
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com
/etc/postfix/main had mailbox_size_limit set to 11 megs - can't believe this
is the default! All 3 users are on holiday, so this is the first time this
limit had been reached...
upped it to half a gig and now the mail is getting through
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com
Obviously isn't this the correct forum for this question. Could someone please
tell me where to post it.
Regards
Lars Ebeling
- Original Message -
From: Lars Ebeling
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 3:48 PM
Subject: sa-learn problems
Dear
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, theWoosh wrote:
/etc/postfix/main had mailbox_size_limit set to 11 megs - can't believe this
is the default! All 3 users are on holiday, so this is the first time this
limit had been reached...
upped it to half a gig and now the mail is getting through
11 messages? T
It s my mistake. :blush:
It was caused by my spam delivery setup. I thought that nod32 was first and
spamfilter was second.
The spamfilter tested emails which were not tagged by nod32.
Thanks for all.
Matt Kettler-3 wrote:
>
> mezcal wrote:
>> Hello,
>> thanks for your sugesstions.
>> spam
I see that you have an old version of SpamAssassin. Try updating to the
latest (3.2.4) and see if the problem goes away. If not, you will probably
find more people willing to help you debug a newer version of SA.
Bowie
-Original Message-
From: Lars Ebeling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent
I tried to install 3.2.5 and got lot of errors. The version that installs good
is the one I am running.
Regards
Lars
- Original Message -
From: Lars Ebeling
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 3:55 AM
Subject: make test a lot of failures on HPUX 11.11
On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 06:24 -0700, theWoosh wrote:
> /etc/postfix/main had mailbox_size_limit set to 11 megs
>
That isn't a default value: the Postfix default is 5120, 50 MB. The
mailbox_size_limit parameter is not defined in the default main.cf for
the current version of Postfix (2.4.5) so if
Hi, thanks for your response...
I didn't set the limit so maybe it was set by default when procmail was
installed - can't remember if it came pre-configured or not (maybe it was
done via CP+ ?)
I am not setting quotas on any of the mail users, so this should not be a
problem I hope
Spamassassin
Howdy folks,
I'm experiencing a problem with some people (myself included) who are not
properly receiving their Consumer's Energy bills. Rather, the bills are
being marked as spam and sent into their SPAM folders. One of the two
things being marked by the Spam-Report are RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP
I
Brian Martinez wrote:
>
> I'm guessing the IP address in question is: 1.226.208.65
>
> While it certainly is not within a range I see all that often, I am
> assured by our hostmaster that it is legit. Another one I've seen is
> 1.226.208.61
As far as I can tell, that IP address is invalid. It
Addresses in the 1.0.0.0/8 are reserved by IANA (note: not reserved for
intranet use, just reserved) and shouldn't be used by anybody (either in
internet or in an intranet), not even a "power" company.
Probably the best approach here is to whitelist the sender. Of course, I
would suggest CMS Energ
Folks,
Thanks for your responses thus-far. It seems that my head is floating in
the clouds today and I appear to be dreaming half of this situation. A
couple of months ago, as I said, our network admin pointed out this
problem to me. I can no longer find the email he sent me where he stated
From: "Bowie Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, 2008, August 13 12:58
Brian Martinez wrote:
I'm guessing the IP address in question is: 1.226.208.65
While it certainly is not within a range I see all that often, I am
assured by our hostmaster that it is legit. Another one I've see
At 14:37 13-08-2008, jdow wrote:
What the heck is Consumers Energy doing using a reserved IP address?
They are not the only ones using these IP addresses for internal
use. It will be interesting to see what happens when these IP
addresses are assigned.
Regards,
-sm
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 03:33:56PM -0700, SM wrote:
> They are not the only ones using these IP addresses for internal
> use. It will be interesting to see what happens when these IP
> addresses are assigned.
Reminds me of a time where I ran into a company who internally were
using long-time pu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 03:33:56PM -0700, SM wrote:
They are not the only ones using these IP addresses for internal
use. It will be interesting to see what happens when these IP
addresses are assigned.
Reminds me of a time where I ran into a compa
Recently there are tons of simple mails like:
ftp://pve.proxmox.com/tmp/sample-spam1.txt
ftp://pve.proxmox.com/tmp/sample-spam2.txt
Seems that they trigger some network tests,
but many get through with low score.
Does anybody know a way to block them effectively without
using network tests?
- D
23 matches
Mail list logo
