Re: Spam tagging not happening

2010-10-19 Thread Jeremy Van Rooyen
Dominic, Ok it seems like SAEximDebug is set to 1, but I don't see anything similar like in your example log My /var/log/exim4/mainlog : 2010-10-19 08:13:50 1P85Q4-0003iH-Gw = p...@decordeli.com H= wblv-ip-mesg-2-3.saix.net [196.25.240.101] P=esmtp S=26973403 id=

Re:Spam tagging not happening

2010-10-19 Thread Jeremy Van Rooyen
Any news for me on this issue? Dominic, Ok it seems like SAEximDebug is set to 1, but I don't see anything similar like in your example log My /var/log/exim4/mainlog : 2010-10-19 08:13:50 1P85Q4-0003iH-Gw = p...@decordeli.com H= wblv-ip-mesg-2-3.saix.net [196.25.240.101] P=esmtp S=26973403 id=

Re: Spam tagging not happening

2010-10-19 Thread Dominic Benson
Surely I'm missing something here and when I do a grep sa-exim /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated, the output is null. Does this mean I don't have sa-exim configured properly? It means that it isn't being used by exim. We're veering away from SA-Users topics, but: if you dpkg-reconfigure

Bayes timeouts and database handle being DESTROY'd without explicit disconnect

2010-10-19 Thread Micah Anderson
Hello, I'm running a busy mail server. We've got a bayes database on its own server, with InnoDB tables. I'm seeing a number of these entries in my log files and am struggling to determine what could be causing them and how to fix them: Oct 19 07:02:10 spamd3 spamd[27474]: learn: exceeded

Re: Bayes timeouts and database handle being DESTROY'd without explicit disconnect

2010-10-19 Thread Dominic Benson
On 19 Oct 2010, at 17:05, Micah Anderson wrote: Hello, I'm running a busy mail server. We've got a bayes database on its own server, with InnoDB tables. What is your total DB size / server RAM? Could you include a snapshot of the output of top from the DB server? I would guess that

Spam US$350,000 not tripped

2010-10-19 Thread Dennis German
I am surprised this plain text spam did not trip for US$350,000 sa 3.2.4 http://www.Real-World-Systems.com/mail/spam.un

Re: Spam US$350,000 not tripped

2010-10-19 Thread Ned Slider
On 19/10/10 22:34, Dennis German wrote: I am surprised this plain text spam did not trip for US$350,000 sa 3.2.4 http://www.Real-World-Systems.com/mail/spam.un It hits a stack of rules here (some are my own scoring) - looks like it's time to upgrade to SA 3.3.1. X-Spam-Report: *

Re: Spam US$350,000 not tripped

2010-10-19 Thread Karsten Bräckelmann
On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 22:41 +0100, Ned Slider wrote: On 19/10/10 22:34, Dennis German wrote: I am surprised this plain text spam did not trip for US$350,000 sa 3.2.4 Uhm, a generic amount of money on it's own is not a sign of spam. You know, some people do deal with and talk about money...

Re: Spam tagging not happening

2010-10-19 Thread Jeremy Van Rooyen
Hi Dominic and Users, I was not using the split configuration of exim4, I'm using the monolithic config at /etc/exim4/exim4.conf.template. So I added this line to my /etc/exim4/exim4.conf.template config file right at the top local_scan_path = /usr/lib/exim4/local_scan/sa-exim.so restarted exim4

Re: Spam US$350,000 not tripped

2010-10-19 Thread Dennis German
On Oct 19, 2010, at 5:56 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 22:41 +0100, Ned Slider wrote: On 19/10/10 22:34, Dennis German wrote: I am surprised this plain text spam did not trip for US$350,000 sa 3.2.4 Uhm, a generic amount of money on it's own is not a sign of spam.

Re: Spam US$350,000 not tripped

2010-10-19 Thread Karsten Bräckelmann
On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 19:29 -0400, Dennis German wrote: Thank you fro the suggestion of adding BRBL and JMF. Can you please point me to some detailed information explaining how to do that. PS I am on a shared server without root access. ( or I would have upgraded SA) The actual rules to be

Re: Spam US$350,000 not tripped

2010-10-19 Thread Ned Slider
On 19/10/10 22:56, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 22:41 +0100, Ned Slider wrote: On 19/10/10 22:34, Dennis German wrote: I am surprised this plain text spam did not trip for US$350,000 sa 3.2.4 Uhm, a generic amount of money on it's own is not a sign of spam. You know, some