On 30 Aug 2016, at 11:03, Anthony Hoppe wrote:
If they're not updated, is it possible to grab the ruleset without
subscribing?
There's no real "subscribing" to update channels per se. If you run
sa-update with no arguments it checks for updates in the
updates.spamassassin.org channel, for wh
Apologies if any of this ends up being not so up to date. It’s been ages since
the Check plugin was written.
You’re most likely going to want to write your own Check plugin to change this
behavior.
If you look at check_main you’ll see the DNS based tests get fired off before
the priority loop
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, Joseph Brennan wrote:
We've had errors the past 2 nights for all of the uridnsbl_skip_domain
rules. It's just us?
It's been fixed, waiting for a new update to be generated by masscheck.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhar...@imp
Am 30.08.2016 um 21:56 schrieb Joseph Brennan:
We've had errors the past 2 nights for all of the uridnsbl_skip_domain
rules. It's just us?
no since there where yesterday at least two treads about this topic, the
first by me and AFAIR it should have been fixed last night but wasn't
which ind
We've had errors the past 2 nights for all of the uridnsbl_skip_domain
rules. It's just us?
Redhat 2.6.32-504.3.3.el6.x86_64
> spamassassin -V
SpamAssassin version 3.4.0
running on Perl version 5.10.1
I'm inserting blank lines for clarity, in case my email client starts
wrapping:
config: fai
Am 30.08.2016 um 18:54 schrieb Kris Deugau:
Nicola Piazzi wrote:
How to do it syncronously ?
It is not important to process a single mail in 5 or 50 seconds
4 me ss most important to reduce load
DNS lookups have essentially zero cost next to almost anything else SA
does
when it comes to da
Nicola Piazzi wrote:
> How to do it syncronously ?
> It is not important to process a single mail in 5 or 50 seconds
> 4 me ss most important to reduce load
DNS lookups have essentially zero cost next to almost anything else SA
does. I can say for certain that shortcircuit works; I use it on the
Only if you want to patch spamassassin
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5930
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 02:30:48PM +, Nicola Piazzi wrote:
> And there is not a solution ?
>
> Nicola Piazzi
> CED - Sistemi
> COMET s.p.a.
> Via Michelino, 105 - 40127 Bologna - Italia
> Tel. +3
Here 2 plugins selfmade
http://saplugin.16mb.com/
If someone send me a feedback it will be appreciate
Actually I am not sure if this is the correct list, as its about plugin
development.. (is that users or dev?)
I have a pluging for detecting attachment file types. It uses
Mail::SpamAssassin::Message::Node get_header method for getting the
content type header (and thus the attachment filename).
H
How to do it syncronously ?
It is not important to process a single mail in 5 or 50 seconds
4 me ss most important to reduce load
-Messaggio originale-
Da: RW [mailto:rwmailli...@googlemail.com]
Inviato: martedì 30 agosto 2016 17:24
A: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Oggetto: Re: R: R: Sh
Ahh. Ok, perhaps I want to avoid them, then... :-D
- Original Message -
From: "Axb"
To: "SpamAssassin"
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2016 10:42:08 PM
Subject: Re: SoughtRules
On 08/30/2016 07:32 AM, jdow wrote:
> On 2016-08-29 17:51, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
>>
>> Am 30.08.2016 um 02:45 sch
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:48:03 +
Nicola Piazzi wrote:
> em is that dns check are made asincronously
> if it will be made sincronously it will happen like you said
> it is not important slowind down all messages because I save a lot of
> query and cpu
Running then synchronously would mean runnin
If they're not updated, is it possible to grab the ruleset without subscribing?
I wouldn't mind taking a look at 'em at least. I want to avoid the rules
becoming "dangerous" like the SARE rules.
~ Anthony
- Original Message -
From: li...@rhsoft.net
To: "SpamAssassin"
Sent: Monday, Au
It's traditional. We wait for the last minute to get our talk proposals
in for conferences.
Well, the last minute has arrived. The CFP for ApacheCon Seville closes
on September 9th, which is less than 2 weeks away. It's time to get your
talks in, so that we can make this the best ApacheCon yet.
I
On 08/30/2016 04:43 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
I'm assuming that BAYES_ZERO is a meta of some sort. Would you also
need to set priority on the other referenced rules, or does SA handle that?
My clairvoyant talent is rusty and as the OP didn't post more info, I
blabbered based on what he posted.
BAYES_ZERO is :
body BAYES_ZERO eval:check_bayes('0.00', '0.00')
but is the same with all other rules
problem is that dns check are made asincronously
if it will be made sincronously it will happen like you said
it is not important slowind down all messages because I save a lot of query and
cpu
I'm assuming that BAYES_ZERO is a meta of some sort. Would you also
need to set priority on the other referenced rules, or does SA handle that?
Also, keep in mind that if you can make this work, you will effectively
be speeding up the processing of mail that matches BAYES_ZERO
(slightly), whi
shot in te dark:
what happens if you do
priority BAYES_ZERO -2000
shortcircuit BAYES_ZERO ham
On 08/30/2016 04:30 PM, Nicola Piazzi wrote:
And there is not a solution ?
Nicola Piazzi
CED - Sistemi
COMET s.p.a.
Via Michelino, 105 - 40127 Bologna - Italia
Tel.
And there is not a solution ?
Nicola Piazzi
CED - Sistemi
COMET s.p.a.
Via Michelino, 105 - 40127 Bologna - Italia
Tel. +39 051.6079.293
Cell. +39 328.21.73.470
Web: www.gruppocomet.it
-Messaggio originale-
Da: li...@rhsoft.net [mailto:li...@rhsoft.net]
Inviato: martedì 30 agosto 2016
Am 30.08.2016 um 16:21 schrieb Nicola Piazzi:
When i shortcircuit a rule not all other are bypassed
Here an example ...
Local.cf :
priority BAYES_ZERO -980
shortcircuit BAYES_ZERO ham
the dns stuff is fired asynchronous long before bayes is even evaluated
When i shortcircuit a rule not all other are bypassed
Here an example ...
Local.cf :
priority BAYES_ZERO -980
shortcircuit BAYES_ZERO ham
Spam report :
-0.03 ABUSIX_PRESENCE Contatto Anti-Abuse presente in abuse-contacts.abusix.org
-1.00 BAYES_ZERO Bayes Zero
On 08/30/2016 11:03 AM, Merijn van den Kroonenberg wrote:
I now realize you asked about SOUGHT while I gave you a bit of SARE
history .
SOUGHT rules were created by Justin Mason, SA's chief dev/inventor for
many years.
They were also independent from the Apache SpamAssassin project and when
>
> I now realize you asked about SOUGHT while I gave you a bit of SARE
> history .
>
> SOUGHT rules were created by Justin Mason, SA's chief dev/inventor for
> many years.
>
> They were also independent from the Apache SpamAssassin project and when
> he moved on to a new job area, he opted to shu
On 08/30/2016 09:59 AM, Merijn van den Kroonenberg wrote:
On Mon, 29 Aug 2016, Anthony Hoppe wrote:
I just learned about the sought ruleset via
https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ImproveAccuracy. Is this ruleset
still actively maintained? I'm considering implementing it in my
environment, b
On 08/30/2016 09:59 AM, Merijn van den Kroonenberg wrote:
On Mon, 29 Aug 2016, Anthony Hoppe wrote:
I just learned about the sought ruleset via
https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ImproveAccuracy. Is this ruleset
still actively maintained? I'm considering implementing it in my
environment, b
> On Mon, 29 Aug 2016, Anthony Hoppe wrote:
>
>> I just learned about the sought ruleset via
>> https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ImproveAccuracy. Is this ruleset
>> still actively maintained? I'm considering implementing it in my
>> environment, but want to make sure just in case.
>
> Sadly,
27 matches
Mail list logo