Am 11.09.2015 um 21:08 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
>Can I safely upgrade SA from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 without changing any local
>configuration files, and without regenerating the Bayes database? (I
>use the default bdb Bayes store.)
On 2015-08-14 17:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
yes, but yo
On 11 Sep 2015, at 17:25, Peter Kelly wrote:
Bill,
I checked there first, I always assume it is something I am doing
wrong
first. Yes mailchecker (not that obsolete version) is the http service
we
use and it in turn uses this Golang lib for spamc -
https://github.com/saintienn/go-spamc
I ca
Sorry, yeah - all BAYES rules were gone after --clear. When I trained it
with another fresh 1000 spam and ham it started again with BAYES_00. I will
need to go through the spam and ham again
On 11 September 2015 at 23:26, RW wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 22:25:46 +0100
> Peter Kelly wrote:
>
>
>
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 22:25:46 +0100
Peter Kelly wrote:
> I can actually see the 0.0 scores directly in the logs
I tested one and it was out, but only by 0.04. I thought it was
probably due to your cron job running a bit too early for this morning's
update.
> It must be the bayes is completely
Bill,
I checked there first, I always assume it is something I am doing wrong
first. Yes mailchecker (not that obsolete version) is the http service we
use and it in turn uses this Golang lib for spamc -
https://github.com/saintienn/go-spamc
I can actually see the 0.0 scores directly in the logs
On 11 Sep 2015, at 6:12, Peter Kelly wrote:
Hi,
Starting on 3rd Sept, I have seen a huge number of 0.0 scores being
returned from spamassassin - see attached screenshot from my logs that
show
I never once received a 0.0 score before 3rd Sept.
The default scores for the rules shown do not ad
>Can I safely upgrade SA from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 without changing any local
>configuration files, and without regenerating the Bayes database? (I
>use the default bdb Bayes store.)
On 2015-08-14 17:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
yes, but you need to run "sa-update" before restart to fetch the
l
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 16:53:17 +0200
Benny Pedersen wrote:
> but there was a dokument error on what -x do on spamd
What I found confusing is that --virtual-config-dir doesn't work
without -x. In other words you have to set the nouser-config option to
make spamd read the user config.
> and -u
Am 11.09.2015 um 18:12 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Ian Zimmerman skrev den 2015-09-11 18:05:
I appreciate you trying to help, but you don't really answer my
question. Even if I could do what you suggest, the rsync would still
take finite time - longer than the interval between the upgrade and th
Ian Zimmerman skrev den 2015-09-11 18:05:
I appreciate you trying to help, but you don't really answer my
question. Even if I could do what you suggest, the rsync would still
take finite time - longer than the interval between the upgrade and the
restart on the production system.
if you recen
Am 11.09.2015 um 18:05 schrieb Ian Zimmerman:
On 2015-09-11 17:35 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Can I safely upgrade SA from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 without changing any local
configuration files, and without regenerating the Bayes database? (I
use the default bdb Bayes store.)
yes, but you need to ru
Ian Zimmerman skrev den 2015-09-11 17:21:
Isn't this a contradiction? If my distribution automatically restarts
(which it does), how can I sneak in a sa-update run after the upgrade
but before the restart?
ask the precompiled problem maintainer, not here, your packege is not
doing well if th
On 2015-09-11 17:35 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >>>Can I safely upgrade SA from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 without changing any local
> >>>configuration files, and without regenerating the Bayes database? (I
> >>>use the default bdb Bayes store.)
> >>
> >>yes, but you need to run "sa-update" before restart
Am 11.09.2015 um 17:54 schrieb RW:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 08:21:15 -0700
Ian Zimmerman wrote:
On 2015-08-14 17:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Can I safely upgrade SA from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 without changing any
local configuration files, and without regenerating the Bayes
database? (I use the defa
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 08:21:15 -0700
Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> On 2015-08-14 17:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> > >Can I safely upgrade SA from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 without changing any
> > >local configuration files, and without regenerating the Bayes
> > >database? (I use the default bdb Bayes store.)
Am 11.09.2015 um 17:21 schrieb Ian Zimmerman:
On 2015-08-14 17:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Can I safely upgrade SA from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 without changing any local
configuration files, and without regenerating the Bayes database? (I
use the default bdb Bayes store.)
yes, but you need to r
Am 11.09.2015 um 16:53 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-09-11 16:12:
spamd: cannot run as nonexistent user or root with -u option
spamd must not be startet with the -u option as root, the whole
purpose is to have the daemon process running as root and then "spamc"
is inv
On 2015-08-14 17:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >Can I safely upgrade SA from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 without changing any local
> >configuration files, and without regenerating the Bayes database? (I
> >use the default bdb Bayes store.)
>
> yes, but you need to run "sa-update" before restart to fetch
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-09-11 16:12:
spamd: cannot run as nonexistent user or root with -u option
spamd must not be startet with the -u option as root, the whole
purpose is to have the daemon process running as root and then "spamc"
is invoked with the -u param of the user which is target
Hi @ everyone,
GOTCHA !
Finally, I found the solution myself: The issue is in the systemd
spamassassin.service unit file of Arch Linux! This is how
/usr/lib/systemd/system/spamassassin.service looks like:
[Unit]
Description=Spamassassin daemon
After=syslog.target network.target
[Service]
Ex
Am 11.09.2015 um 16:05 schrieb Marc Richter:
thanks for your ideas, they look reasonable.
But I think it might be not the solution, since
1. my spamd runs as spamd:spamd and my home-dirs/-files have rw
permissions for at least group spamd:
ww@tango012 ~ $ ls -ald .spamassassin .spamassassin/*
Hi Olivier,
thanks for your ideas, they look reasonable.
But I think it might be not the solution, since
1. my spamd runs as spamd:spamd and my home-dirs/-files have rw
permissions for at least group spamd:
ww@tango012 ~ $ ls -ald .spamassassin .spamassassin/*
drwxrwx--- 2 wwspamd 409
On 09/11/2015 03:13 PM, Peter Kelly wrote:
Axb,
We have a SaaS app hosted in AWS that takes in 500k emails a month. We
parse these emails and convert them into tickets for the customer - they
see a Helpdesk system like Zendesk. Every incoming email gets run through
spamassassin via the daemon.
On 09/11/2015 03:13 PM, Peter Kelly wrote:
Axb,
We have a SaaS app hosted in AWS that takes in 500k emails a month. We
parse these emails and convert them into tickets for the customer - they
see a Helpdesk system like Zendesk. Every incoming email gets run through
spamassassin via the daemon.
On 11.09.15 14:13, Peter Kelly wrote:
We have a SaaS app hosted in AWS that takes in 500k emails a month. We
parse these emails and convert them into tickets for the customer - they
see a Helpdesk system like Zendesk. Every incoming email gets run through
spamassassin via the daemon.
does spama
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-09-11 15:08:
in other words: you don't need to pay for them until you not have your
own recursion resolver because URIBL_BLOCKED won't go away in that
case
its just badly marketing :=)
Axb,
We have a SaaS app hosted in AWS that takes in 500k emails a month. We
parse these emails and convert them into tickets for the customer - they
see a Helpdesk system like Zendesk. Every incoming email gets run through
spamassassin via the daemon.
Here is a link to the output of --lint -D htt
Peter Kelly skrev den 2015-09-11 15:01:
This has nothing to do with URIBL. It has always been blocked for me.
I am in the process of paying for their service. It has always been
like that, yet the 0.0 scores only started last week. Been running for
months before that.
so you already have a loc
Am 11.09.2015 um 15:03 schrieb Peter Kelly:
Why Antony? What would that do for me other than save hits against
URIBL? I am signing up for their paid service so I will not have the
URIBL_BLOCKED issue anymore. It does not explain the 0.0 issue I am
having anyway.
what is so hard to understand
Am 09.09.2015 um 15:01 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
how do you plug spamassassin into your mail flow? How do you call
spamassassin? mta, mail client ... ?
On 09.09.15 16:11, Marc Richter wrote:
I'm running postfix as my MTA. In it's master.cf there is configured
to pipe my mail through a sc
Why Antony? What would that do for me other than save hits against URIBL? I
am signing up for their paid service so I will not have the URIBL_BLOCKED
issue anymore. It does not explain the 0.0 issue I am having anyway.
On 11 September 2015 at 13:42, Antony Stone <
antony.st...@spamassassin.open.so
Hi Benny,
This has nothing to do with URIBL. It has always been blocked for me. I am
in the process of paying for their service. It has always been like that,
yet the 0.0 scores only started last week. Been running for months before
that.
Peter
On 11 September 2015 at 13:38, Benny Pedersen wrot
> On 09/11/2015 01:17 PM, Peter Kelly wrote:
> > - Are you using a local, non forwarding, DNS resolver/caching server ?
> >
> > No
> > - Are you handling mail for a company, personal email, ISP, one domain,
> > many domains, etc?
> >
> > Handling mail for thousands of different companies - we r
Peter Kelly skrev den 2015-09-11 12:12:
Any help greatly appreciated,
google URIBL_BLOCKED
https://www.google.dk/search?q=uribl_blcoked
http://uribl.com/refused.shtml
plenty of other links to see how and why
do you miss a local dns resolver ?
if yes you use shared problems and things like
On 09/11/2015 01:17 PM, Peter Kelly wrote:
- How are you using SA?
(pls specify: amavis, MIMEDefang, a milter, Mailscanner, procmail,
Fuglu, etc, etc)
Just spamassassin on its own, calling the daemon from an app
an "app"? Pls be more explicit.
can you pastebin the output of
spamassassin --li
please keep list mail on list...
On 09/11/2015 01:17 PM, Peter Kelly wrote:
- Please post missed spam samples in pastebin.com - do not post
samples to mailing lists
I'll post example shortly
- What SA version are you using? and on what operating system?
3.4.0 on Ubuntu 14.04
- How are you u
Peter Kelly writes:
> [1:multipart/alternative Hide]
>
>
> [1/1:text/plain Hide]
>
> Hi,
>
> Starting on 3rd Sept, I have seen a huge number of 0.0 scores being
> returned from spamassassin - see attached screenshot from my logs that show
> I never once received a 0.0 score before 3rd Sept.
Like
On 09/11/2015 12:12 PM, Peter Kelly wrote:
Hi,
Starting on 3rd Sept, I have seen a huge number of 0.0 scores being
returned from spamassassin - see attached screenshot from my logs that show
I never once received a 0.0 score before 3rd Sept.
I use version 3.4.0 and process about 20k emails a da
No, no changes. Run a manual check with -D and look for issues. Maybe your
sql password changed or something that your install uses?
I would also look at the uribl blocked issue. Maybe that started on the 3rd for
you? Perhaps your dns server is not working right and causing timeouts. See
ht
Marc Richter writes:
> Hi KAM,
>
> why not - spamassassin seems to respect the user_prefs file. Of course
> I'd like to stick ti spamc, but if there is no solution for the
> user_prefs - issue, it fits only half of my needs.
Sorry for jumping in the conversation, I have not read all the messag
I can't disagree as I was answering the why it exists.
What are using user prefs to accomplish because I prefer using sql based prefs?
Regards,
KAM
On September 11, 2015 5:50:43 AM AST, Marc Richter
wrote:
>Hi KAM,
>
>why not - spamassassin seems to respect the user_prefs file. Of course
>I'
Am 11.09.2015 um 11:35 schrieb Marc Richter:
Guess this means that I have to run "spamassassin" instead of spamc,
don't I?
I do not understand the reason for spamc to exist then
uhm because it does the real work?
in the case below milter -> spamd -> spamc preforkers
[root@mail-gw:~]$ syste
Hi KAM,
why not - spamassassin seems to respect the user_prefs file. Of course
I'd like to stick ti spamc, but if there is no solution for the
user_prefs - issue, it fits only half of my needs.
Best regard,
Marc
Am 11.09.2015 um 11:47 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
Spamc exists to save startup c
Spamc exists to save startup compilation time.
If you have real users and use procmail then spamc will be much faster and pass
along the username.
If you use a glue or have virtual users, you might need logic to call spamc or
spamassassin with a desired username. But for me, I would anticipate
Guess this means that I have to run "spamassassin" instead of spamc,
don't I?
I do not understand the reason for spamc to exist then - but based upon
the conversation result, it seems like the way to go ... hope my host
can handle the load.
Am 10.09.2015 um 12:50 schrieb Marc Richter:
Hi @
45 matches
Mail list logo
