On 5/15/2015 10:00 AM, Joe Quinn wrote:
On 5/15/2015 9:49 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 5/15/2015 9:43 AM, Axb wrote:
Kartsten's GUDO plugin also uses uri_to_domain
What do we have to replace that function with?
The uri_to_domain is now in
Mail::SpamAssassin::RegistryBoundaries
On 5/11/2015 9:42 AM, Alex Regan wrote:
Hi,
I have a fp that was passed through thomsonreuters, hitting
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, receiving -5 points, from an obvious hacked account.
http://pastebin.com/5LYS7s2v
This is with v3.4.1, but an older bayes database, so perhaps it needs
to be rebuilt.
On 5/1/2015 10:55 AM, Larry Rosenman wrote:
http://pastebin.com/4gck7uLD
This one and one's like it seem to get through multiple times/day.
Any help here? Today's is WITH 3.4.1..
That's a variant on a pretty old campaign that I haven't seen get
through in a long while.
I've updated
On 4/30/2015 9:10 AM, Birta Levente wrote:
On 30/04/2015 15:55, Joe Quinn wrote:
On 4/30/2015 7:09 AM, Birta Levente wrote:
Hi
I saw the bug report about TxRep warning:
_WARN: Use of uninitialized value $msgscore in addition (+) at
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin
On 4/30/2015 9:22 AM, Joe Quinn wrote:
On 4/30/2015 9:10 AM, Birta Levente wrote:
On 30/04/2015 15:55, Joe Quinn wrote:
On 4/30/2015 7:09 AM, Birta Levente wrote:
Hi
I saw the bug report about TxRep warning:
_WARN: Use of uninitialized value $msgscore in addition (+) at
/usr/share/perl5
On 4/30/2015 7:09 AM, Birta Levente wrote:
Hi
I saw the bug report about TxRep warning:
_WARN: Use of uninitialized value $msgscore in addition (+) at
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/TxRep.pm line 1415.
_WARN: Use of uninitialized value $msgscore in subtraction (-)
I
On 4/24/2015 9:38 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 24.04.2015 um 15:22 schrieb Dianne Skoll:
On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 15:17:45 +0200
Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
v=spf1 exists:gmail.com -all
makes no sense - the spammer don't own the domain in most cases and
if they do then they just
On 4/24/2015 11:23 AM, Dianne Skoll wrote:
On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 16:20:41 +0100
Paul Stead paul.st...@zeninternet.co.uk wrote:
I've had thoughts of an extension which calculates the number of IP
addresses specified in an SPF record, then calculating the % of
world-wide addresses this SPF
On 4/17/2015 7:58 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 4/17/2015 6:46 AM, ma...@nucleus.it wrote:
Hi to all,
a saw that from spamassassin 3.4 Bayes can be stored on a Redis
database.
Is it possible also for Awl (auto_whitelist) ?
Or maybe in the future ?
We are currently looking at TxRep as a
On 4/2/2015 4:23 PM, Axb wrote:
Gals (3?) Guys
If you're being plagued by the new TLD spams AND using SA 3.4.x
don't forget blacklist_uri_host
per default it's scored
score URI_HOST_IN_BLACKLIST 100
but you may want to be less radical and just use a score butnot treat
as a poison pill rule
Sorry if this seems newbie-ish, but . . .
I just got (a) phish purporting to be a major CC and had to scroll way down the
html stuff to find the phishy link.
Will this address that problem?
joe a.
Axb axb.li...@gmail.com 04/02/15 4:25 PM
Gals (3?) Guys
If you're being plagued by the new
On 3/31/2015 12:12 PM, Mike Cardwell wrote:
* on the Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:59:39AM -0400, Joe Quinn wrote:
Is it possible to enable or disable RBL and/or SPF checks according to
the existence or lack of a header?
Without going into too many details, I need a way of transmitting
On 3/31/2015 12:23 PM, Mike Cardwell wrote:
* on the Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:15:31PM -0400, Joe Quinn wrote:
Here's an example from when Yahoo's internal Received headers were
hitting RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP, taken from here:
http://www.pccc.com/downloads/SpamAssassin/contrib/KAM.cf
header
On 3/31/2015 11:45 AM, Mike Cardwell wrote:
Is it possible to enable or disable RBL and/or SPF checks according to
the existence or lack of a header?
Without going into too many details, I need a way of transmitting to
SpamAssassin at scan-time that it should not run SPF or RBL checks on
a
On 3/26/2015 9:19 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 26.03.2015 um 14:13 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:02:19 +0100
Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote:
Silent discard mail is mostly forbidden in the EU,
Is it? Could you perhaps point me to the EU directive stating this?
I'm
On 2/18/2015 2:10 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 18.02.2015 um 20:00 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 10:52:49 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin jhar...@impsec.org wrote:
Macros are not inherently evil.
No, they're not, but AutoRun macros are guilty until proven
otherwise, IMO.
(And adding
Perhaps /usr/local/bin is not on PATH for the cron user?
On 2/4/2015 10:50 AM, LuKreme wrote:
Cron is sending me an error:
error: gpg required but not found! It is not recommended, but you can use
sa-update with the --no-gpg to skip the verification.
However, if I run sa-update -D from the
On 1/17/2015 at 9:22 PM, cool hand luke coolhandl...@coolhandluke.org
wrote:
On 01/17/2015 03:59 PM, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
Just checking.
From http://www.list.org/mailman-member/node25.html:
7.6 I don't seem to be getting mail from the lists. What should I do?
There are a few
To start, there are several very real things wrong with your example
message. In my opinion, that message was correctly classified.
Do you have any better-representative samples that you can paste in
full? (http://pastebin.com/)
Have you tried using -D bayes to see what tokens are being
Just checking.
We've been having password reset emails marked as spam by Gmail. We've
tried rephrasing the email body/subject/from email, to no avail. We've
even tried registering as a bulk sender
(https://support.google.com/mail/contact/bulk_send_new?rd=1) and
googling for anyone having similar issues. Has
On 12/15/2014 12:20 PM, Herbert Eppel wrote:
I use QiQ.co.uk for web hosting and associated e-mail services. QiQ
offer SpamAssassin as an integrated feature that is accessible via
cPanel -- see screenshot below.
In view of the fact that some of my domains are increasingly inundated
with
On 12/15/2014 12:34 PM, Herbert Eppel wrote:
On 15.12.2014 17:27 UK Time, Joe Quinn wrote:
On 12/15/2014 12:20 PM, Herbert Eppel wrote:
I use QiQ.co.uk for web hosting and associated e-mail services. QiQ
offer SpamAssassin as an integrated feature that is accessible via
cPanel -- see
On 12/8/2014 9:28 AM, btb wrote:
Apparently in the first case a score set 1 was chosen, and in the
second case a score set 3. Availability of a bayes scanner choses
between the two.
i'm ignorant here - what is a score set? is there documentation i can
read up on?
The term score set refers to
On 12/5/2014 1:19 PM, Gibbs, David wrote:
On 12/5/2014 11:25 AM, John Hardin wrote:
FWIW: here's the rule I came up with ... seems to work adequately.
header __COUNT_SUBJ Subject =~ /.*/
You might want to be a little bit more paranoid and explicitly anchor
that:
header __COUNT_SUBJ
On 12/4/2014 11:17 AM, listsb-spamassas...@bitrate.net wrote:
hi-
i sent a message to the list yesterday, but have not yet seen it appear. can
someone check? my logs indicate successful delivery to mx1.us.apache.org:
Dec 3 17:48:24 mta postfix/smtp[10226]: 3jtFgN6Dfmz9s2b:
On 12/4/2014 1:40 PM, listsb-spamassas...@bitrate.net wrote:
On Dec 04, 2014, at 12.18, Joe Quinn jqu...@pccc.com wrote:
On 12/4/2014 11:17 AM, listsb-spamassas...@bitrate.net wrote:
hi-
i sent a message to the list yesterday, but have not yet seen it appear. can
someone check? my logs
On 12/1/2014 10:24 AM, Joe Quinn wrote:
On 12/1/2014 10:11 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 12/1/2014 9:21 AM, Burnie wrote:
On 11/30/2014 11:29 PM, John Hardin wrote:
Would a corrected syntax version of this work?
if version 3.004001 perl_version = 5.01
body
On 12/1/2014 10:11 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 12/1/2014 9:21 AM, Burnie wrote:
On 11/30/2014 11:29 PM, John Hardin wrote:
Would a corrected syntax version of this work?
if version 3.004001 perl_version = 5.01
body NON_588_COMPATIBLE_RE_SYNTAX /\w++/
endif
Yes. That *does* work.
We are setting up some honeypot email addresses, and were wondering if
anyone here had tips on how to include those addresses on webpages and
other places.
We're currently going with a pretty simple !-- honey...@example.com --
HTML comment. Is that too obvious? Should we put it into a CSS
On 11/9/2014 11:07 AM, David B Funk wrote:
On Sun, 9 Nov 2014, David B Funk wrote:
For NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR the rule is: /^https?\:\/\/\d{7}/is
If that pattern were terminated like:
/^https?\:\/\/\d{7}(?::\d+)?(?:\/|$)/is
it should prevent the FPs (hopefully with out destroying its
We've been getting hammered by spam from 163.com for quite a while now,
and I really /really/ want to blacklist it, but it's one of the largest
websites in the world.
Everything I have found on Google points to them being blatant spammers,
down to the Wikipedia talk page. Does anyone else
On 11/12/2014 12:57 PM, Axb wrote:
On 11/12/2014 06:45 PM, Joe Quinn wrote:
We've been getting hammered by spam from 163.com for quite a while now,
and I really /really/ want to blacklist it, but it's one of the largest
websites in the world.
Everything I have found on Google points to them
Comments on the ZD net article that claims shellshock exploit via crafty SMTP
headers? Just asking, that's all . . .
I attached a link to it below, please excuse if that is improper behavior.
http://www.zdnet.com/shellshock-attacks-mail-servers-735094/
We got this from Kevin Miller kevin_mil...@ci.juneau.ak.us who posted
it to users@ on 15 May 2014.
We've made some tweaks since then and because it's not ours we are
hesitant to post it in KAM.cf, but here is what we are currently using:
# HTML BR
rawbody __CBJ_GiveMeABreak1 /(?:\/?br
On 10/27/2014 3:52 PM, Chris Brandstetter wrote:
A Chris Brandstetter
Linux/UNIX System Administrator
Nebraska Wesleyan University
⌘
You should email users-unsubscr...@spamassassin.apache.org to unsubscribe.
Before you do though, where did you read that this was how to
unsubscribe from the
On 10/24/2014 7:25 AM, Paul Stead wrote:
Not sure if this is a legit listing, however it's causing problems for
some of my user base.
I've added btconnect.com to my uridnsbl_skip_domain list
Paul
--
*Paul Stead*
Systems Engineer
*Zen Internet*
Nothing legit came up when we were spot-checking
After reading your reply, I re-examined the message and found the case was
an incorrect Content-Type:
~~~
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250;
name=pdfname.pdf
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=pdfname.pdf
~~~
So it was scanning the base64 as
http://qz.com/263013/for-390-you-can-buy-a-harvard-email-account-on-chinas-biggest-online-marketplace/
Most of the article is off topic, but I liked the mention of being able
to buy *.edu email addresses. We see them from time to time, especially
Harvard, and it always makes me wonder how much
On 9/4/2014 1:51 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, LuKreme wrote:
For the record, using sql for babes is considerably faster.
Is that anything like SQL for Dummies?
I've heard good things about the Derek Zoolander Center for Kids who
can't SQL Good and who Wanna Learn to do Other
On 8/27/2014 11:56 AM, Kris Deugau wrote:
*sigh*
Just got a FP report...
... about an Out of Office message...
... generated by Outlook 15...
... which, among other things, seems to go to great lengths to look like
spam, by way of the HTML formatting overkill that hits a local rule for
HTML
On 8/26/2014 8:04 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Hi
i am tyring to write own RBL rules for blacklisting and
especially whitelisting using internal DNSBL/DNSWL but
my first try results in warnings at startup
sadly the Wiki don't refer to check_rbl()
https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/WritingRules
On 8/20/2014 3:34 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
What poison pills are they ;)
Someone suggested using kam and I'm happy now. I figure they are not
with SA spirit that no one rule should make that happen but... yeah.
One helluva rules!
:)
We're always curious how our rules work for other
Sorry to be OT.
I thought this would be simple, but I am getting muddled, at this time of day.
Have setup a postfix host to accept email from various (local) hosts and
forward. The initial idea was to simply create a list of people for whom to
forward email to another domain (translating the
On 8/15/2014 10:14 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 8/15/2014 7:05 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Having got SA working at last on my CentOS-7 home server,
I'm thinking of improving its use for me (no-one else).
It's finding about 65% of my spam, and I'd like to increase that to 80%.
The best way to
On 8/15/2014 1:50 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
John Hardin jhar...@impsec.org wrote:
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014, David F. Skoll wrote:
SPF is so easy (v=spf1 +all)
Doing *that* should be worth a point or two by itself.
Yes. I even through about implementing
On 8/13/2014 12:24 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Both of those are recent, I believe and both have reasons to
blacklist. Reporting here is fine. Joe will look at moving them to our
marketing list but in the end you might have to consider a custom
score because we consider places with convicted
additional rules?
Cheers,
Noah
On 7/31/14 12:27 PM, Joe Quinn wrote:
On 7/31/2014 3:19 PM, Noah wrote:
Hi there,
what are some things to check with spamassassin commonly running at
100 percent? I used apt-get to reinstall of spamassassin
3.3.2-2ubuntu1 and no cure. nothing in the syslog
On 8/5/2014 1:08 PM, Andy Balholm wrote:
The last few days, I’ve been getting a lot of spams that have a similar
pattern. They are plain-text messages, and each one ends with a paragraph from
a restaurant review (apparently to confuse bayesian filters), with some numbers
inserted. There is an
For some time have been fetching (POP-ing) mail from a provider.
Now have sprung for static IP and an allotted pipe size and was going to change
my MX to deliver directly to me.
Suddenly, I am struck with the question of what happens to my wonderful
stockpile of HAM'n'SPAM (corpus I think
On 8/4/2014 at 5:03 PM, RW rwmailli...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 15:22:03 -0400
Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
For some time have been fetching (POP-ing) mail from a provider.
Now have sprung for static IP and an allotted pipe size and was going
to change my MX to deliver
On 7/31/2014 3:19 PM, Noah wrote:
Hi there,
what are some things to check with spamassassin commonly running at
100 percent? I used apt-get to reinstall of spamassassin
3.3.2-2ubuntu1 and no cure. nothing in the syslog that seems relevant.
Ubuntu 12.04
Linux 3.15.4-x86_64
Cheers,
It
On 7/30/2014 10:47 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On July 30, 2014 12:28:44 PM ML mail mlnos...@yahoo.com wrote:
It looks like SpamAssassin tries to INSERT an entry (e-mail address)
which already exists. Shouldn't SpamAssassin AWL code first check if
an entry exists or not and use UPDATE instead
Something we have noticed is that Google blocks email from servers that
use IPv6 but do not have an SPF record.
Is there any value to implementing a similar rule for SA with a
relatively small score?
If your domain does not use SPF, DKIM, or DMARC, you're not even trying
to prevent forgeries.
On 7/25/2014 1:18 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 13:07:34 -0400
Joe Quinn jqu...@pccc.com wrote:
Something we have noticed is that Google blocks email from servers
that use IPv6 but do not have an SPF record.
Really? We have not noticed that. We have a number of customers
://lwn.net/Articles/178409/ which points
out that some UNIX desktop environments are repeating the mistake made
by Windows.)
Regards,
David.
Actually, that goes back to the days of XX-DOS, CP . . err, umm . . . Lordy,
now I do feel old.
joe a.
like this to simply be from the original sender.
Is this possible and how?
joe a
Well, err, umm, please excuse the intrusion. Operator malfunction. (it helps
to actually have mail sent from off box . . . ahem)
Joe Acquisto-j4 j...@j4computers.com 06/26/14 12:58 PM
OT, but hoping someone can cut thru the weeds for me.
A new setup, with the intent that this machine do
On 6/16/2014 9:42 AM, Dave Pooser wrote:
On 5/30/14 11:11 AM, Kevin A. McGrail kmcgr...@pccc.com wrote:
Good time for an update to the users list about the issue. The box that
processed the updates at the ASF collo failed catastrophically during a
power surge that took down some other boxes
On 6/12/2014 10:27 PM, Tom Robinson wrote:
Hi,
Sorry to bother you with this. As referenced on the ApacheSpamAssassin Wiki for
AutoWhiteList
(https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AutoWhitelist) I downloaded the Truxoft
version of the
sa-heatu utility
We received a report that our published ruleset is slow on large emails
(http://www.pccc.com/downloads/SpamAssassin/contrib/KAM.cf)
After doing our own profiling (using Finding slow rules under
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/FasterPerformance), we have not been
able to reproduce anything
On 6/12/2014 10:57 AM, Axb wrote:
On 06/12/2014 03:11 PM, Joe Quinn wrote:
We received a report that our published ruleset is slow on large emails
(http://www.pccc.com/downloads/SpamAssassin/contrib/KAM.cf)
After doing our own profiling (using Finding slow rules under
http://wiki.apache.org
On 6/9/2014 11:34 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 6/9/2014 3:47 AM, Ben Stover wrote:
As far as I found out SpamAssassin calculates the spam score and puts
the value into the email header.
What is the maximum range of the score?
-10,,+10
or other?
There are no limits on the score. The
On 5/28/2014 12:46 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 5/28/2014 12:44 PM, Arthur Glennie wrote:
Specific to spamassassin, are capture groups ever useful, or should I
always use non-capture groups?
Eg. (lit) vs. (?:lit)
I believe ?: will always be ever so slightly more efficient.
He's asking if
On 5/28/2014 2:10 PM, Arthur Glennie wrote:
[quote]
The only place I've found backreferences useful is when writing a header
rule that is looking for the same string in multiple headers.
Other than that, captures are very rare.
If SA had a way to capture a match from rule1 and use that in rule2
On 3/27/2014 12:34 PM, Marcin Mirosław wrote:
W dniu 24.02.2014 16:24, John Hardin pisze:
Hi!
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Marcin Mirosław wrote:
Sorry for silly question. I'd like to know if mentioned rules catches
all email address or only user part?
It's not a silly question. All of the
On 3/20/2014 4:25 PM, Kevin Miller wrote:
KAM_BODY_URIBL_PCCC and KAM_FROM_URIBL_PCCC are clobbering a lot of legitimate
mail. I'd like to drop the score. Can I just put
score KAM_BODY_URIBL_PCCC1.0
score KAM_FROM_URIBL_PCCC1.0
in local.cf? Since KAM.cf changes
On 3/5/2014 7:18 AM, Ben wrote:
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
On 3/5/2014 9:57 AM, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
On Mar 5, 2014, at 10:40 PM, Neil Schwartzman n...@cauce.org wrote:
Yeah. An abused, and abusive redirector. They only deal with abuse
Monday-Friday, 9:00-17:00.* They never break links, but put an interstitial in
between the victim and the
This pattern has been showing up in a good 80% of spam I have looked at
in the past month.
Spammers take a few paragraphs out of a large body of text and put it at
the end of their email. My favorite is one that had the scene where
Daisy first meets Jay Gatsby.
Sometimes they add some
On 2/12/2014 3:15 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Joe Quinn wrote:
This pattern has been showing up in a good 80% of spam I have looked
at in the past month.
Spammers take a few paragraphs out of a large body of text and put it
at the end of their email. My favorite is one
I've attached a munged example of a strange pattern we've just started
getting.
It consists of BODY_8BITS, plus an empty text/plain, nearly empty
text/html, and some other office attachment.
Is there a good way to match for the empty plain and html parts? The
__KAM_BODY_LENGTH_LT_XXX rules
On 2/10/2014 12:14 PM, Axb wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:16 PM, Joe Quinn wrote:
I've attached a munged example of a strange pattern we've just started
getting.
It consists of BODY_8BITS, plus an empty text/plain, nearly empty
text/html, and some other office attachment.
Is there a good way
On 1/29/2014 11:53 AM, Andy Jezierski wrote:
I've been noticing a lot of spam getting through with the same traits,
a bunch of random words within brackets. They all seem to come after
the /body or the /html tag. Anyone much more knowledgeable than
me care to assist with a rule to detect
We semi-frequently get notified of spam in the form of AOL's notorious
abuse reports. The actual spam is an attachment of mime type
message/rfc822, which we have to extract by hand to make them easier to
organize. We would like to have a tool that operates on all of these
messages in one
Magnificent! Thanks for the quick reply.
I will try this out when I get a chance. Do I have permission to copy
your code below, with attribution of course?
On 12/31/2013 10:57 AM, Kris Deugau wrote:
Joe Quinn wrote:
We semi-frequently get notified of spam in the form of AOL's notorious
We are noticing a lot of spam coming from domains that are less than two
months old. Is there a good way to detect this automatically?
We've thought about whois, but do not want to get blocked for looking
like we are harvesting information.
Regards,
JMQ
have to chalk this one up as not worth the
effort. :(
On 12/19/2013 10:13 AM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Joe Quinn jqu...@pccc.com wrote:
Isn't that where Kevin works too? Couldn't you just walk down the hall
and ask him? lol
We are noticing a lot of spam coming from
The file 10_hasbase.cf has the following rule:
uri __HAS_URI /./
Is there a similar rule anywhere (or a way to write one), which could
match against emails containing many URIs?
I have searched for __HAS_.*_URIS to see if the concept exists, and I
cannot think of any combination of
) and if we fail to block a spam it can appear we are the
source.
and ?, do you see your own logs who use spamcop.com as rbl ?
http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/spamcop.com
users of wot dont trust them
o rly:
https://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/spamcop.net
--
Joe Sniderman joseph.snider
mails
you've already accepted on their behalf (sounds like this may be the
case) do you then generate a bounce? Could some of those bounces be what
caused the listing in the first place?
Just throwing some ideas out there..
--
Joe Sniderman joseph.snider...@thoroquel.org
David F. Skoll d...@roaringpenguin.com 10/16/13 2:32 PM
. . . .as long as they don't mind
paying extra and don't mind the NSA having access to their email. :)
Regards,
David.
Of course you mean easier access . . . ?
joe a.
I've been having various issues with changes to local.cf not taking.
Seem to have resolved these, yet there is one more issue that troubles.
(mostly typos apparently, BTW)
So today, after getting changes to BAYES weights to take, I found some SPAM
gets thru anyway as the
score come up short,
On 9/14/2013 at 7:40 AM, RW rwmailli...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 07:24:31 -0400
Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
I've been having various issues with changes to local.cf not taking.
Seem to have resolved these, yet there is one more issue that
troubles. (mostly typos apparently
On 9/14/2013 at 11:24 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas uh...@fantomas.sk wrote:
On 14.09.13 08:12, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
Yes the displayed scores are all rounded.
Yet, just now, I got this:
(which apparently did not round the same way ?? Just trying to understand)
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status
On 9/14/2013 at 10:47 AM, Kevin A. McGrail kmcgr...@pccc.com wrote:
On 9/14/2013 7:24 AM, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
I've been having various issues with changes to local.cf not taking.
Seem to have resolved these, yet there is one more issue that troubles.
(mostly typos apparently, BTW)
So
should
repost this with details of what I
have done so far, as even those of kind and gentle nature may not be inclined
to search it out.
But I won't clutter further, if there is no interest.
joe a.
Joe Acquisto-j4 j...@j4computers.com 08/21/13 9:45 AM
Bear in mind, that will tell
Thanks for the leads.
On 9/6/2013 at 10:05 AM, Kris Deugau kdeu...@vianet.ca wrote:
Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
. . .
I read back a bit in the thread; you've definitely got something
strange going on.
I don't see a couple of bits of information that might help narrow it down:
- which
Thank you for the advice. I will attempt to follow it. For today, it's been
a long one and my stamina is not yet up to par. So more tomorrow perhaps.
joe a.
On 9/6/2013 at 9:42 AM, Axb axb.li...@gmail.com wrote:
if you need help, the best way is to:
- stay *concise* at all times
joe a.
Well, now that I increased the size, they did too. However, now it slips
thru without a word as to why.
mime below (large section of fill words snipped to meet pastebin limit):
http://pastebin.com/7hSxDZmg
Should it at least tell me it skipped due to size?
OK, so
On 8/23/2013 at 6:43 AM, Joe Acquisto-j4 j...@j4computers.com wrote:
On 8/23/2013 at 3:42 AM, James Griffin j...@kontrol.kode5.net wrote:
!-- On Wed 21.Aug'13 at 14:51:56 BST, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
(uh...@fantomas.sk), wrote:
On 21.08.13 09:47, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
I find a few
On 8/23/2013 at 3:42 AM, James Griffin j...@kontrol.kode5.net wrote:
!-- On Wed 21.Aug'13 at 14:51:56 BST, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
(uh...@fantomas.sk), wrote:
On 21.08.13 09:47, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
I find a few of those 3 link (sudden craving for an IHOP breakfast spams,
that contain
of references, for example, to BAYES_99 in
/usr/share/spamassassin/blah.cf. I certainly don't know if these would
override the setting in /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf.
joe a.
the default is 256000.
If that is so, can someone clue me as to where to adjust this? A quick scan of
the usual sources did not satisfy.
joe a.
user (me) and the defined spam user (whose name I do see in
logs) use /etc/spamassassin/local.cf (per lint), is that still worth trying?
joe a.
John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhar...@impsec.orgFALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org
On 8/20/2013 at 5:00 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas uh...@fantomas.sk wrote:
On 19.08.13 18:23, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
So, I have this in my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf:
is that the same as /etc/spamassassin/local.cf?
Don't have one of those.
/etc/mail/spamassassin is where bayes_db, sa
,
which is quite verbose. But has not lead me to a solution. It may be trying
to . . .
joe a.
, it appears your message did not
trigger the rule...
Subject: SUBJ_ALL_CAPS
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=10.0
tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
Maybe a string of multiple words separated by underscores is not
considered multiword...
--
Joe Sniderman joseph.snider
So, I have this in my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf:
score RP_MATCHES_RCVD 0
Yet, even after restart of spamd, mail comes thru with a -2.8.
What should I look at?
I know other stuff is read as I changed trusted and local network IP's and had
a typo in one. lint called me out on it.
joe a.
On 8/19/2013 at 6:54 PM, John Hardin jhar...@impsec.org wrote:
On Mon, 19 Aug 2013, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
So, I have this in my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf:
score RP_MATCHES_RCVD 0
Yet, even after restart of spamd, mail comes thru with a -2.8.
I assume you mean
201 - 300 of 511 matches
Mail list logo
