k
--
[*] sys4 AG
https://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Schleißheimer Straße 26/MG,80333 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer, Wolfgang Stief
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
n, it serves +20
million customers.
p@rick
--
[*] sys4 AG
https://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Schleißheimer Straße 26/MG,80333 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
atime delta
0.000 0 783449 0 non-token data: last expire
reduction count
Could anyone suggest how I might find out what is going awry ?
Ben
--
Sent from Postbox
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email_medium=siglink_campaign=reach>
--
Sent from Postbox
&
Hi
I didnt have that option but I did have bayes_sql_username set
I have added the sql_override as well.
I have restarted and will see what happens.
I am using the ubuntu exim-daemon heavy and it calls spamd directly.
Ben
Axb <mailto:axb.li...@gmail.com>
09 September 2015 15:10via P
spam corpus.
Which the override statement is sorting.
Ben
Matus UHLAR - fantomas <mailto:uh...@fantomas.sk>
09 September 2015 15:55via Postbox
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email_medium=sumlink_campaign=reach>
Ben Whyall <mailto:b...@whyall-systems.co.uk>
09 Septe
, but
i tried to reduce the number of redis command executed.
I hope this will reduce the overhead significant.
that's great news. Thanks!
Feedback and test results welcome.
I will, as soon as I have something to share!
p@rick
Am 2015-07-15 23:22, schrieb Patrick Ben Koetter:
Markus
Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
On 27/06/2015 23:00, Jo Rhett wrote:
All versions of Yosemite have removed all functionality for sending
abuse reports to helpdesks.
Jo,
You're making a few mountains out of molehills here !
They have not removed all functionality, they have removed ONE function.
There is nothing stopping
I can't speak about the specifics of this particular change, but
anything that makes it harder to trivially forward a message,
Whilst I obviously can't argue with you in the context of making it easy
to report spam, there are a couple of things to point out.
First, Jo said have removed all
München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
amavisd uses the spamassassin libraries internally, it does not use the
spamassassin command, nor spamd. If you update parts of the config,
you'll need to reload/restart amavisd.
Aah... I must have missed that bit of the fabulous manual... ;-(
On 10/06/2015 12:32, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
I'm hitting over spam threshold on the message and have a simple redir
for Google match in KAM.cf.
1.0 KAM_GOOGLE_STRING URI: Use of Google redir appearing in spam
July
2006
0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY:
- Enable RBLs and DBLs. zen.spamhaus.org is the best way to block the
majority of junk before it reaches SA. Just make sure you are below their
free threshold limit. One important way to do this is
One important way to do this in terms of the Spamhaus threshold limit
is to not be
://www.google.com/url?q=; in order to
obfuscate their URLs, as a DBL check countermeasure I suspect.
Ideas most welcome !
Ben
I have a curious conundrum.
A piece of spam received shows the following in the header when
processed via amavis and spamd :
DATE_IN_PAST_03_06,
HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,
RDNS_DYNAMIC,
SHORTENED_URL_SRC
But when the exact piece of Spam is fed
On 04/06/2015 16:06, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
a lack of updates does not present a user issue. It is my opinion that
if an admin is concerned about rules updates, they should be monitoring
dev@ and/or ruleqa@.
Lack of updates seems to be to be important enough to merit a little
post to
And while I do monitor users@ for issues, a lack of updates
does not present a user issue. It is my opinion that if an admin is
concerned about rules updates, they should be monitoring dev@ and/or
ruleqa@.
Plus, let's have a look at the definitions of aforementioned lists :
Dev
Unless you
talking about a mitm problem is nonsense, these mails are just sent to
your facebook emial address and forwarded to the email account in your
profile settings
Sounds a lot like a MTIM problem to me !
Sender - FB SMTP - we don't know what happens here - Receipient
;-)
I've seen a few examples of IT Recycling emails being missed in the
Spamassassin net recently. Spamassasin has been scoring them very low.
I've kept back a couple of the most recent specimens, I am running
Spamassassin 3.4.0 on Ubuntu 14 LTS. Ubuntu is fully up to date, and
sa-update is
This is dicey ESP bulk which SA will hardly ever detect.
To help tag this you'll need to :
- feed/use Bayes
- implement Razor/Pyzor/DCC (if not already done)
- write rules - header rules to score on certain X Headers, URI rules,
etc.
or track their IP ranges and reject at MTA level
(would be
detection, amavis takes
you there as well.
p@rick
--
[*] sys4 AG
https://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian
Is there an official port of SpamAssassin to Windows ?
in a file SpamAssassin.sfd but I have no clue on
how to define it there.
I would appreciate if someone could give me a guide on how to accomplish this?
Thank you
Ben
Yes, I have to disabled TBs built-in adaptive junk mail control. So junk mail
handling relys only on SpamAssassin.
At the ASF, there is an infrastructure team that manages those type of
issues. They work hard and do a lot of good but unfortunately, there
was a disconnect back in 2009 and a backup request was not implemented
correctly.
An untested backup is not a backup. Some people only ever seem to
a gaussian distribution graphic
visualisation?
Ben
On 05/03/2014 05:47, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On 2014-03-04 18:52, Ben wrote:
Just for my reference, is there a way to affect the score rather than
skip completely ?
score FOO (1) (1) (1) (1)
add one point to FOO rule
it also works with negative scores that will subtract scores
post sample
Hi,
I'm filtering strongly on Spamhaus DBLwhich is working great.
Except for bit.ly which Spamhaus take exception to.
How can I reduce the weighting specifically for the bit.ly domain ?
Thanks !
Ben
uridnsbl_skip_domain bit.ly
Thanks, will try that.
or you liked the other way, score when bit.ly is in urls ?
Just for my reference, is there a way to affect the score rather than
skip completely ?
-and-ham-td38832.html
The short answer is that you can, and probably should, increase the
BAYES_99 score value to 4 or 4.5. Setting it to 5 puts you at risk
(albeit very slight) for false-positives.
-Ben
, for more reason than one.)
I sincerely doubt that this is a problem with your mailbox format.
Have a look at the thread I cited and see if anything jumps-out at you.
-Ben
On 6/18/2013 1:18 PM, Amir 'CG' Caspi wrote:
At 8:58 AM -0400 06/18/2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
a.) You are copying/pasting the body of the email, but not the headers.
No, I am copying the headers... however, I am using Eudora (ancient, I
know) as a mail client, and it's possible the headers
to find
commonalities between the messages that could be used to generate some
other rules.
Thanks,
Alex
Isn't this the function that Bayes is intended to serve, rather precisely?
-Ben
AMaViS, and the header changes look slightly different from
yours, but I see no evidence that Bayes scoring is being used in the
above header (if, in fact, that is a sample header with all SA markup
appended).
--Ben
-sorted corpus that is *retained*) and
implement greylisting (provided you can live with its caveats).
The DNSBLs can be used to supplement the above.
Good luck, Brian!
--Ben
the following in my mail log for any .pw sender:
postfix/smtpd[10660]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
unknown[173.213.124.203]: 554 5.7.1 i...@schemecompany.pw: Sender
address rejected: Access denied
Much appreciated!
-Ben
for modifications in our system.
Thank you for letting us know about the issue.
So, if you are having problems with domains registered with Namecheap, I
suggest that you open a support request for the Domains -- Legal and
Abuse department. From the sounds of it, you'd be doing us all a big favor!
-Ben
come to your attention in the
first place?
-Ben
of these messages? I would think
Bayes to be far more effective against this type of spamming (given the
dynamic nature of the domains and IP addresses) than writing custom rules.
-Ben
.
Alternatively, you could dig into your tables and attempt to identify
where those values actually live. Once we have the offending table,
further troubleshooting will be possible.
-Ben
On 4/20/2013 3:20 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Ben Johnson skrev den 2013-04-20 05:02:
Yes, I believe that me and the system always execute SA commands as the
amavis user. When I was using the SQL setup, I had the following in
local.cf:
bayes_path /var/lib/amavis/.spamassassin/bayes
here! Thanks for all the expert help, guys.
-Ben
On 4/18/2013 12:18 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
My concern now is that I am on 3.3.1, with little control over upgrades.
I have read all three bug reports in their entirety and Bug 6624 seems
to be a very legitimate concern. To quote Mark in the bug description:
The effect of the bug
flag
directive an the -t switch. I was actually using the -t switch to
produce the output that I pasted two messages back. So, it seems that
the X-Spam-Tok-Stat output is added only when the token count is high
enough to be useful.
Still stumped here...
-Ben
On 4/19/2013 12:12 PM, Axb wrote:
On 04/19/2013 06:02 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
Still stumped here...
do a bayes sa-learn --backup
switch to file based in SDBM format (which is fast)
do a
sa-learn --restore
feed it a few thousand NEW spams
see what happens
Thanks
On 4/19/2013 1:54 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Ben Johnson skrev den 2013-04-19 18:02:
Still stumped here...
for amavisd-new, put spamassassin sql setup into user_prefs file for the
user amavisd-new runs as might be working better then have insecure sql
settings in /etc/mail/spamassassin
bayes_sql_override_username amavis
Sorry for the confusion!
-Ben
On 4/19/2013 11:02 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 4/19/2013 1:54 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Ben Johnson skrev den 2013-04-19 18:02:
Still stumped here...
for amavisd-new, put spamassassin sql setup into user_prefs file
On 4/17/2013 10:15 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
The first post on that page was the key. In particular, adding the
following to each MySQL CREATE TABLE statement:
ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COLLATE=utf8_bin;
Please check the SpamAssassin
On 4/18/2013 12:26 PM, Axb wrote:
On 04/18/2013 06:18 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
I have done some searching-around on the string cannot use bayes on
this message; not enough usable tokens found and have not found
anything authoritative regarding what this message might mean and
whether
Daniel, thanks for the quick reply. I'll reply inline, below.
On 4/16/2013 5:01 PM, Daniel McDonald wrote:
On 4/16/13 2:59 PM, Ben Johnson b...@indietorrent.org wrote:
Are there any normal circumstances under which Bayes tests are not run?
Yes, if USE_BAYES = 0 is included
On 4/17/2013 5:05 PM, Kris Deugau wrote:
Ben Johnson wrote:
Is there anything else that would cause Bayes tests not be performed? I
ask because other types of tests are disabled automatically under
certain circumstances (e.g., network tests), and I'm wondering if there
is some obscure
On 4/17/2013 6:47 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 4/17/2013 5:05 PM, Kris Deugau wrote:
Ben Johnson wrote:
Is there anything else that would cause Bayes tests not be performed? I
ask because other types of tests are disabled automatically under
certain circumstances (e.g., network tests
On 4/17/2013 5:39 PM, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
On 17-04-13 21:40, Ben Johnson wrote:
Ideally, using the above directives will tell us whether we're
experiencing timeouts, or these spam messages are simply not in the
Pyzor or Razor2 databases.
Off the top of your head, do you happen to know what
is setup
correctly (database was wiped and now training is done manually and is
supervised), and that network tests are being performed when messages
are scanned.
Thanks for sticking with me through all of this, guys!
-Ben
On 1/18/2013 11:51 AM, Ben Johnson wrote:
So, I've been keeping an eye
#section-1.2 has been established. The
documentation should mention that.
p@rick
--
[*] sys4 AG
http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc
@rick
--
[*] sys4 AG
http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Joerg Heidrich
--
[*] sys4 AG
http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Joerg Heidrich
mailbox formats is done within less
than a minute in Dovecot.
p@rick
--
[*] sys4 AG
http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer
On 2/7/2013 11:13 AM, Marc Perkel wrote:
On 2/7/2013 6:58 AM, RW wrote:
On Tue, 05 Feb 2013 07:20:24 -0800
Marc Perkel wrote:
is there a way I can put something in a rule that would cause bayes
not to learn - such as a rule that detects bayes poisoning?
Why do you think this is a good
On 2/1/2013 12:00 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 1 Feb 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
John, thanks for pointing-out the problems associated with re-sending
the messages via sendmail.
I threw a line out to the Dovecot users group and learned how to move
messages without going through the MTA
these issues, specifically.
Thanks again!
-Ben
On 1/31/2013 5:50 PM, RW wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:12:15 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
So, I finally got around to tackling this change.
With a couple of simple modifications, I was able to achieve the
desired result with the Dovecot
that this approach to user-based SpamAssassin training is useful
to others.
Best regards,
-Ben
this one do have
evidence of BAYES_* tests, so, it's not as though something is
completely broken.
Are there any normal circumstances under which Bayes tests are not run?
Do I need to turn debugging back on and wait until this happens again?
Thanks for all the help, everyone!
-Ben
On 1/15/2013 5:22 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 1/15/2013 1:55 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 1/14/2013 8:16 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
Question: do you have any SMTP-time hard
On 1/16/2013 2:02 AM, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
On 1/15/13 5:26 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
In postfix's main.cf:
snip
Hmm, very interesting. No, I have no greylisting in place as yet, and
no, my userbase doesn't demand immediate delivery. I will look into
greylisting further.
If you're
On 1/16/2013 11:00 AM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 1/15/2013 5:22 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
Wow! Adding several more reject_rbl_client entries to the
smtpd_recipient_restrictions directive in the Postfix configuration
On 1/16/2013 2:22 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 1/16/2013 1:18 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 1/16/2013 11:00 AM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
Is it possible that the training I've been doing over the last week or
so wasn't *effective* until recently, say, after
On 1/14/2013 7:48 PM, Noel wrote:
On 1/14/2013 2:59 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
I understand that snowshoe spam may not hit any net tests. I guess my
confusion is around what, exactly, classifies spam as snowshoe.
Snowshoe spam - spreading a spam run across a large number of IPs so
no single
On 1/14/2013 8:16 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
I understand that snowshoe spam may not hit any net tests. I guess my
confusion is around what, exactly, classifies spam as snowshoe.
http://www.spamhaus.org/faq/section/Glossary
Basically, a large
On 1/15/2013 1:55 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 1/14/2013 8:16 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
Question: do you have any SMTP-time hard-reject DNSBL tests in place? Or
are they all performed by SA?
In postfix's main.cf
that message be kept and fed to
sa-learn so that Bayes can soak-up all the tokens from a message that is
almost certainly spam (based on the other tests)?
Am I making any sense?
Thanks again!
-Ben
On 1/15/2013 4:05 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 1/15/2013 3:47 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
One final question on this subject (sorry...).
Is there value in training Bayes on messages that SA classified as spam
*due to other test scores*? In other words, if a message is classified
as SPAM due
On 1/15/2013 4:39 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 1/15/2013 4:27 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 1/15/2013 4:05 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 1/15/2013 3:47 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
One final question on this subject (sorry...).
Is there value in training Bayes on messages that SA classified as spam
*due
On 1/11/2013 4:27 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
I enabled Amavis's SA debugging mode on the server in question and was
able to extract the debug output for two messages that seem like they
should definitely be classified as spam.
Message #1: http://pastebin.com/xLMikNJH
Message #2: http
On 1/14/2013 2:49 PM, RW wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:24:55 -0500
Ben Johnson wrote:
A clear pattern has emerged: the X-Spam-Status headers for very
obviously spammy messages never contain evidence that network tests
contributed to their SA scores.
Ultimately, I need to know whether
On 1/10/2013 4:12 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Ben Johnson wrote:
So, at this point, I'm struggling to understand how the following
happened.
Over the course of 15 minutes, I received the same exact message four
times. Each time, the message was sent to the same recipient
On 1/10/2013 3:13 PM, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
On 10-01-13 19:55, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 1/10/2013 1:06 PM, RW wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:48:07 -0500
Ben Johnson wrote:
pon further consideration, this behavior makes perfect sense if the
mailbox user has moved the message from Inbox to Junk
On 1/10/2013 11:49 AM, RW wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:43:44 -0500
Ben Johnson wrote:
This observation begs the question: why are network tests being
performed for some messages but not others? To my knowledge, no
white/gray/black listing has been done on this box.
As has already
On 1/10/2013 12:18 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 1/10/2013 11:49 AM, RW wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:43:44 -0500
Ben Johnson wrote:
This observation begs the question: why are network tests being
performed for some messages but not others? To my knowledge, no
white/gray/black listing
On 1/10/2013 1:06 PM, RW wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:48:07 -0500
Ben Johnson wrote:
pon further consideration, this behavior makes perfect sense if the
mailbox user has moved the message from Inbox to Junk between scans;
Dovecot's Antispam filter is in use on this server. This action
0 3191 0 non-token data: last expire
reduction count
Ultimately, it seems that I should be trying to figure out how, exactly,
Amavis is calling SpamAssassin in the course of normal operation.
Thanks for any help here, folks!
-Ben
On 1/9/2013 5:36 PM, RW wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 17:14:05 -0500
Ben Johnson wrote:
About five months ago, I experienced a problem that I *thought* I had
resolved, but I am observing similar behavior after retraining the
Bayes database. While the symptoms are similar, the root cause
On 1/9/2013 7:36 PM, wolfgang wrote:
On 2013-01-10 01:03, Ben Johnson wrote:
I see; I saved the email message out of Thunderbird (with View -
Headers - All), as a plain text file. Apparently, that process
butchers the original message.
In Thunderbird, rather use File Save as to save
for sale.
p@rick
--
[*] sys4 AG
http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Joerg Heidrich
On 10/4/2012 2:06 PM, troxlinux wrote:
Hi list , I try to run sa-learn on centos 6.3 but no work
sa-learn --spam --showdots /dir/dir/domain.com.ni/spam/.spam/cur/
Learned tokens from 0 message(s) (1 message(s) examined)
ERROR: the Bayes learn function returned an error, please re-run
On 8/22/2012 9:05 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 8/21/2012 5:51 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/21/2012 5:19 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
Aug 21 13:08:33.729 [23714] dbg: bayes: tie-ing to DB file R/O
/var/lib/amavis/.spamassassin/bayes_toks
---8
On 8/22/2012 9:43 AM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 8/21/2012 5:51 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
What good is the --username switch, then?
Thanks for the follow-up, John!
See other responses.
Why does this command train the root user's database?
Because
On 8/22/2012 10:26 AM, Axb wrote:
On 08/22/2012 04:10 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
I did end-up overriding the bayes_path, which provided a workaround for
the permissions issues. Cheers to the suggestion.
This is not a workaround, it's common practice in many types of setups
and documented
On 8/20/2012 2:47 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
I was able to resolve the issue by adding the --username switch to the
'sa-learn' executable:
# sa-learn --username=amavis --spam
/var/vmail/example.com/trainer/Maildir/.INBOX.Spam/cur
Thanks for all of the hints, folks!
So, I've been training
On 8/21/2012 5:19 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
Aug 21 13:08:33.729 [23714] dbg: bayes: tie-ing to DB file R/O
/var/lib/amavis/.spamassassin/bayes_toks
---8--
# sa-learn --username=amavis --dump magic
Run that with --debug and verify
On 8/17/2012 11:28 AM, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/16/2012 2:00 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
Basically, I need to do something about the spam inundation, as soon as
possible.
Is there any reason that I should NOT be performing the sa-learn
training under
On 8/20/2012 12:56 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 8/20/2012 12:46 PM, Axb wrote:
On 08/20/2012 06:42 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/17/2012 11:28 AM, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/16/2012 2:00 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
Basically, I need to do something about
On 8/20/2012 2:02 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/20/2012 12:56 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 8/20/2012 12:46 PM, Axb wrote:
On 08/20/2012 06:42 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/17/2012 11:28 AM, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/16/2012 2:00 PM, Ben Johnson wrote
* Michael Scheidell michael.scheid...@secnap.com:
On 8/17/12 12:11 AM, jonathonb wrote:
As such a detailed knowledge of its history
or inner working is not necessary as I am only interested in YOUR views and
contributors will remain anonymous.
No, we do all of this for fame and fortune.
We
On 8/16/2012 2:00 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
In any event, at this point, I'm confused as to which user account I
should be using when executing sa-learn --spam, for example.
As a bit of background, I'm using ISPConfig 3, which implements virtual
mailbox users via MySQL.
I dug through
On 8/15/2012 4:05 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/15/2012 2:24 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
Some 99% of the spam that I receive, which is grossly spammy (we're
talking auto loans, cash advances, dink pills, the whole
On 8/16/2012 10:14 AM, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/15/2012 4:05 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/15/2012 2:24 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
Some 99% of the spam that I receive, which is grossly spammy (we're
talking auto
On 8/16/2012 11:38 AM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
So, after disabling auto-learn (for now) and executing sa-learn
--clear, and restarting Amavis, I'm still seeing this:
No, score=0.593 tag=-999 tag2=3 kill=13 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001
On 8/16/2012 12:32 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
On 8/16/2012 11:38 AM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012, Ben Johnson wrote:
So, after disabling auto-learn (for now) and executing sa-learn
--clear, and restarting Amavis, I'm still seeing
-bayes-filter-16948/
Outside of the above forum post, search query results for this issue are
scant.
Thanks for any help,
-Ben
1 - 100 of 301 matches
Mail list logo
