spamassassin or spamd with amavisd-new?

Hello, Because FH_DATE_PAST_20XX bug, I have found that when I run spamassassin through amavisd-new (in a postfix server) I need to restart spamassassin and amavisd-new after any change in spamassassin. Debugging this, I found that amavisd-new doesn't connect to my spamd daemon to check ma

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

On 1/4/2010 1:55 PM, Larry Starr wrote: On Monday 04 January 2010, Michael Scheidell wrote: On 1/4/10 1:36 PM, Larry Starr wrote: On Saturday 02 January 2010, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote: My question, short of running with "-D", which is a bit noisy, is there a way to get sa-update to report the

Re: spamassassin or spamd with amavisd-new?

On 5.1.2010 13:09, Angel L. Mateo wrote: Hello, Because FH_DATE_PAST_20XX bug, I have found that when I run spamassassin through amavisd-new (in a postfix server) I need to restart spamassassin and amavisd-new after any change in spamassassin. Debugging this, I found that amavisd-new doesn't co

Re: ANNOUNCE: Apache SpamAssassin 3.3.0-rc1 available

Warren Togami wrote: Apache SpamAssassin 3.3.0-rc1 is now available for testing. I've been running 3.3.0-rc1 for a little over a week with no noticeable issues, but I've made an observation that I'd like to note. I have several role accounts (hostmaster, abuse, etc) set with the all_spam_to

Re: ANNOUNCE: Apache SpamAssassin 3.3.0-rc1 available

On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 13:40, Jason Bertoch wrote: > Warren Togami wrote: >> >> Apache SpamAssassin 3.3.0-rc1 is now available for testing. >> > > I've been running 3.3.0-rc1 for a little over a week with no noticeable > issues, but I've made an observation that I'd like to note.  I have several >

ClamAV Plugin Question

I saw this plugin listed in the SA Wiki, and contacted the author listed in the Wiki about this issue. Seems he's disowned the thing, and he suggested asking here. Is anyone on the list using this plugin? I just installed the ClamAV plugin for SpamAssassin. This is a fresh install of SpamAssas

Re: ANNOUNCE: Apache SpamAssassin 3.3.0-rc1 available

Justin Mason wrote: On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 13:40, Jason Bertoch wrote: Warren Togami wrote: Apache SpamAssassin 3.3.0-rc1 is now available for testing. I've been running 3.3.0-rc1 for a little over a week with no noticeable issues, but I've made an observation that I'd like to note. I have

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

> > After a bit of digging I found that sa-update had, in fact, updated my > > system > > before I read this. On 04.01.10 15:41, Alex wrote: > sa-update had also updated my system, and amavisd was restarted. > However, the 72_active.cf in /usr/share/spamassassin somehow overrode > the updated one

Re: ClamAV Plugin Question

On Tuesday January 5 2010 14:45:30 Art Greenberg wrote: > I saw this plugin listed in the SA Wiki, and contacted the author listed > in the Wiki about this issue. Seems he's disowned the thing, and he > suggested asking here. Is anyone on the list using this plugin? > > I just installed the ClamAV

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 13:54, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: >> > After a bit of digging I found that sa-update had, in fact, updated my >> > system >> > before I read this. > > On 04.01.10 15:41, Alex wrote: >> sa-update had also updated my system, and amavisd was restarted. >> However, the 72_ac

False positive for LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS

An email sent to me containing a book review in French was recently falsely classified as spam, largely because it failed the LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS rule: 2.0 LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS BODY: Mentions viagra clone 'cialis' I quote offending part of the message: ... de\s sa sortie en 1978, comme un outil

Re: ANNOUNCE: Apache SpamAssassin 3.3.0-rc1 available

Justin Mason wrote: Did you have the Shortcircuit plugin active in 3.2.5? Yes, and it is still loading in v320.pre. --lint -D: Jan 5 08:47:50.247 [10430] dbg: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Shortcircuit from @INC Could there have been some custom settings in the config files

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 13:54, Matus UHLAR - fantomas > wrote: > >> > After a bit of digging I found that sa-update had, in fact, updated my > >> > system > >> > before I read this. > > > > On 04.01.10 15:41, Alex wrote: > >> sa-update had also updated my system, and amavisd was restarted. > >>

Re: False positive for LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS

On 05.01.10 07:19, cmvhk wrote: > An email sent to me containing a book review in French was recently falsely > classified as spam, largely because it failed the LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS rule: > > 2.0 LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS BODY: Mentions viagra clone 'cialis' > > I quote offending part of the message:

Re: False positive for LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS

Cmvhk wrote on Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:19:15 -0800 (PST): > 2.0 LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS BODY: Mentions viagra clone 'cialis' Sure, that this rule is part of standard SA? I can't find it in 3.2.5 or 3.3.0. Apart from this, if that message came out as spam with these additional 2 points it must have al

About upgrading

After the scare about the 2010 problem, it was found that there was no problem, but that was because an old version of SpamAssassin was used (3.0.4). The web-site says it is not a big problem to upgrade to the latest version. But in how far is this really the case? Are there surprises to be aware o

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

On 05.01.10 14:54, Justin Mason wrote: one way this could happen: the /var/lib/... rules are from an older version of SA, but the /usr/share/... rules are from the one corresponding to what is used when amavisd is run. I'd call this broken... Do you expect it to be the problem?

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

Terry Carmen wrote: /usr/share/spamassassin/72_active.cf contains < header FH_DATE_PAST_20XXDate =~ /20[1-9][0-9]/ [if-unset: 2006] < describe FH_DATE_PAST_20XXThe date is grossly in the future. /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002005/updates_spamassassin_org/72_active.cf contains > header

Re: False positive for LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS

On 01/05/2010 03:19 PM, cmvhk wrote: An email sent to me containing a book review in French was recently falsely classified as spam, largely because it failed the LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS rule: 2.0 LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS BODY: Mentions viagra clone 'cialis' I quote offending part of the message: ...

semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

I've recently gotten multiple spams from linkedin. (I don't consider invitations from people I dimly have heard of spam.) These are typically invitations that are sent to mailinglists, and occasionally invitationos from people that I have never ever heard of. I believe what is going on is that

Re: False positive for LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS

On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:19:15 -0800 (PST) cmvhk wrote: > 2.0 LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS BODY: Mentions viagra clone 'cialis' > > ... > Could the rule be rewritten so as not to catch instances such as > this? It's not a default rule and "LOCAL_" looks like a prefix used by your admin for local r

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

On 01/05/2010 12:06 PM, Jason Bertoch wrote: Terry Carmen wrote: /usr/share/spamassassin/72_active.cf contains < header FH_DATE_PAST_20XXDate =~ /20[1-9][0-9]/ [if-unset: 2006] < describe FH_DATE_PAST_20XXThe date is grossly in the future. /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002005/updates_spam

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

Terry Carmen wrote: For SA 3.2.5 and earlier, default rules are installed to /usr/share/spamassassin and are only used if none exist in /var/lib/spamassassin, typically created by using sa-update. I'm running 3.2.5. Since it uses sa-update can all non-customized rules be deleted from /usr/s

Re: False positive for LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS

Ned Slider wrote: bodyLOCAL_BODY_CIALIS /\bcialis/i That's probably what the rule is, and it will match 'spe/cialistes'. Joseph Brennan Columbia University Information Technology

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 12:37 -0500, Terry Carmen wrote: > I just did a "find" and have: > > /usr/local/share/spamassassin/72_active.cf > /usr/share/spamassassin/72_active.cf > /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002005/updates_spamassassin_org/72_active.cf > > Should I have all three or can I safely delete ei

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

On Tuesday 05 January 2010, Thomas Harold wrote: > On 1/4/2010 1:55 PM, Larry Starr wrote: > > On Monday 04 January 2010, Michael Scheidell wrote: > >> On 1/4/10 1:36 PM, Larry Starr wrote: > >>> On Saturday 02 January 2010, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote: > >>> > >>> My question, short of running with "

Re: False positive for LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS

On 01/05/2010 06:39 PM, Joseph Brennan wrote: Ned Slider wrote: body LOCAL_BODY_CIALIS /\bcialis/i That's probably what the rule is, and it will match 'spe/cialistes'. Joseph Brennan Columbia University Information Technology Yep, my apologies, I missed the broken spe/cial... in the o

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now! (custom sa-update script from howtoforge)

On 1/5/2010 1:50 PM, Larry Starr wrote: On Tuesday 05 January 2010, Thomas Harold wrote: You mean something more then: "An update was available, and was downloaded and installed successfully. You are now running sa-update version svn607589." Which is the message generated by sa-update on my s

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

On 01/05/2010 01:43 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote: On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 12:37 -0500, Terry Carmen wrote: I just did a "find" and have: /usr/local/share/spamassassin/72_active.cf /usr/share/spamassassin/72_active.cf /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002005/updates_spamassassin_org/72_active.cf Should I

Re: [SPAM:9.6] semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:10:28 -0500 Greg Troxel wrote: > > I've recently gotten multiple spams from linkedin. (I don't consider > invitations from people I dimly have heard of spam.) These are > typically invitations that are sent to mailinglists, and occasionally > invitationos from people tha

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

On Tuesday 05 January 2010 19:43:59 Martin Gregorie wrote: > On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 12:37 -0500, Terry Carmen wrote: > > I just did a "find" and have: > > > > /usr/local/share/spamassassin/72_active.cf > > /usr/share/spamassassin/72_active.cf > > /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002005/updates_spamassassin_o

Re: [SPAM:9.6] semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

Christian Brel wrote: > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:10:28 -0500 > Greg Troxel wrote: > > >> >> Does anyone have any ideas of what else might help? >> > > > #ADD TO THE END OF local.cf at your own risk > score RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED 0 4.3 0 4.3 > score RCVD_IN_SSC_TRUSTED_COI 0 3.7 0 3.7 > score HA

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now!

On 01/05/2010 02:22 PM, Mark Martinec wrote: On Tuesday 05 January 2010 19:43:59 Martin Gregorie wrote: On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 12:37 -0500, Terry Carmen wrote: I just did a "find" and have: /usr/local/share/spamassassin/72_active.cf /usr/share/spamassassin/72_active.cf /var/lib/spamas

Re: About upgrading

On 05.01.10 17:51, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > After the scare about the 2010 problem, it was found that there was no > problem, but that was because an old version of SpamAssassin was used > (3.0.4). The web-site says it is not a big problem to upgrade to the > latest version. But in how far is this

Re: semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

On Jan 5, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > Once again I went to returnpath and senderscorecertified's web pages, > and found no link to an email address to report being spammed by one of > their customers. Is the font size for "Contact Us" and "Support" too small? I'll forward your report

Re: semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

On 1/5/10 12:10 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: Does anyone have any ideas of what else might help? we blacklisted linkedin because, despite my personally hitting the web page that says 'I never want invitations', I still get them. they are also violating federal can-spam laws since their email is

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now! (custom sa-update script from howtoforge)

On Tuesday 05 January 2010, Thomas Harold wrote: > On 1/5/2010 1:50 PM, Larry Starr wrote: > > On Tuesday 05 January 2010, Thomas Harold wrote: > >> You mean something more then: > >> > >> "An update was available, and was downloaded and installed successfully. > >> You are now running sa-update ve

Re: About upgrading

There's always a document about updating from the various old versions, read it and you will be prepared for most problems. But your SA is *really* old, expect some minor config problems. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com

Compiling error on Snapshots from svn.spamassassin.org

Hy, Our setup is: - Ubuntu 8.04 ( 2.6.26 ) - Trying to setup snapshots from http://svn.apache.org/snapshots/spamassassin/ - Tested: spamassassin_20100104211200.tar.gz spamassassin_20100105031200.tar.gz

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now! (custom sa-update script from howtoforge)

Larry Starr wrote: > From my install there is a "/etc/cron.daily/spamassassin" which I'm not > using, > that provides none of that information. > > I believe I will have to implement a wrapper script to, at least, notify me > when updates have been applied. > I patched sa-update to add a ver

Re: About upgrading

Kai Schaetzl wrote: There's always a document about updating from the various old versions, read it and you will be prepared for most problems. But your SA is *really* old, expect some minor config problems. Kai Hy, Thanks for your advice but I have already read the UPGRADE file. We are

Re: semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

From: "J.D. Falk" Sent: Tuesday, 2010/January/05 12:43 On Jan 5, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: Once again I went to returnpath and senderscorecertified's web pages, and found no link to an email address to report being spammed by one of their customers. Is the font size for "Contac

Re: [sa] Re: semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

On Tue, 5 Jan 2010, J.D. Falk wrote: : On Jan 5, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: : > Once again I went to returnpath and senderscorecertified's web pages, : > and found no link to an email address to report being spammed by one of : > their customers. : Is the font size for "Contact Us" and "

Re: [sa] Re: semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

O My suggestion: Setup a link/page that provides for rapid reporting by pasting an offending e-mail without a bunch of form-filling. Just use a captcha to avoid poisoning :) - C or an industry standard, RFC REQUIRED abuse@ address. Section 1 of RFC2142 However, if a given service

Re: [sa] Re: semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

On Tuesday 05 January 2010, Charles Gregory wrote: >On Tue, 5 Jan 2010, J.D. Falk wrote: >: On Jan 5, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: >: > Once again I went to returnpath and senderscorecertified's web pages, >: > and found no link to an email address to report being spammed by one of >: > th

Re: Apache SpamAssassin Y2K10 Rule Bug - Update Your Rules Now! (custom sa-update script from howtoforge)

On Tuesday January 5 2010 22:47:42 Bowie Bailey wrote: > I patched sa-update to add a verbose option which outputs all the > channel names that had changes. Very simple patch if anyone is > interested. It installs cleanly on 3.2.5, I haven't tried 3.3. This looks like an useful small patch. Coul

Re: semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

"J.D. Falk" writes: > On Jan 5, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > >> Once again I went to returnpath and senderscorecertified's web pages, >> and found no link to an email address to report being spammed by one of >> their customers. > > Is the font size for "Contact Us" and "Support" too

ALL_TRUSTED rule no longer working

Previously I was running SpamAssassin-3.1.8_1 on FreeBSD. I recently upgraded to 3.2.5_4. It's seems now, I never get any hits on the rule ALL_TRUSTED. Previously it seemed like SA was doing some kind of dynamic evaluation which was working well. - Julian

junkemailfilter FP - impressive speed of resolving

Lest people think I object to all whitelists, I'd like to point out that tonight I got spam from reachmail.net that was listed in HOSTKARMA_WL. I sent it off to supp...@junkemailfilter.com and SEVEN AND A HALF MINUTES later Marc told me that the offending sender had been removed From the whitelist

Re: About upgrading

Kai Schaetzl writes: > There's always a document about updating from the various old versions, > read it and you will be prepared for most problems. But your SA is > *really* old, expect some minor config problems. I did the upgrade. It took some time and there was a slight problem with permis

Re: spamassassin or spamd with amavisd-new?

On 1/5/2010 6:09 AM, Angel L. Mateo wrote: > Hello, > > Because FH_DATE_PAST_20XX bug, I have found that when I run > spamassassin through amavisd-new (in a postfix server) I need to > restart spamassassin and amavisd-new after any change in spamassassin. > > Debugging this, I found that a

Re: ALL_TRUSTED rule no longer working

On 1/5/2010 8:03 PM, Julian Yap wrote: > Previously I was running SpamAssassin-3.1.8_1 on FreeBSD. > > I recently upgraded to 3.2.5_4. > > It's seems now, I never get any hits on the rule ALL_TRUSTED. > > Previously it seemed like SA was doing some kind of dynamic evaluation > which was working wel

Re: [SPAM:9.6] semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 14:39 -0500, Bowie Bailey wrote: > Christian Brel wrote: > > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:10:28 -0500 > > Greg Troxel wrote: > > > > > >> > >> Does anyone have any ideas of what else might help? > >> > > > > > > #ADD TO THE END OF local.cf at your own risk > > score RCVD_

Re: [SPAM:9.6] Re: semi-legit senders in DNSWL and habeas - a hard problem

On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:18:54 -0800 "jdow" wrote: > From: "J.D. Falk" > Sent: Tuesday, 2010/January/05 12:43 > > > > On Jan 5, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > > >> Once again I went to returnpath and senderscorecertified's web > >> pages, and found no link to an email address to repor