Re: spamc -h received in message body

On 5/21/2011 10:37 PM, Quinn Comendant wrote: > Anybody seen this before? > > We have a client on our mail server who occasionally and randomly receives > emails which contain nothing other than the output from `spamc --help` (see > output at

Re: Rule dependency problems with v3.3.2-r929478

On Mon, 23 May 2011, Alex wrote: Is there a method for separating the experimental rules from those that are relatively safe to use in production? Nightly masschecks.  Apparently we are short on recent SPAM, so the rules are not being auto-promoted.  If you have a good collection of hand-grade

Re: Rule dependency problems with v3.3.2-r929478

On Mon, 23 May 2011, Daniel McDonald wrote: On 5/21/11 8:52 PM, "Alex" wrote: Is there a method for separating the experimental rules from those that are relatively safe to use in production? Nightly masschecks. Apparently we are short on recent SPAM, so the rules are not being auto-promot

Re: Rule dependency problems with v3.3.2-r929478

23.5.2011 16:01, Alex kirjoitti: > > Can any amount of information be changed in the email for anonymity? > The masscheck operates on your computer, on your data. It does not send the email corpus anywhere, only couple small logfiles having the results per rule. -- All the troubles you have

Re: Rule dependency problems with v3.3.2-r929478

Hi, >> Is there a method for separating the experimental rules from those >> that are relatively safe to use in production? > > Nightly masschecks.  Apparently we are short on recent SPAM, so the rules > are not being auto-promoted.  If you have a good collection of hand-graded > SPAM, you should

Re: Rule dependency problems with v3.3.2-r929478

On 5/21/11 8:52 PM, "Alex" wrote: > Hi, > >>> I'm also using a few of John's rules, including the advance_fee, >>> fillform, and lotsa_money. I think some of his rules reference the >>> missing khop rules. >>> >>> When trying to lint the rules, I receive the following: >>> >>> ADVANCE_FEE_2