On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 7:33 PM Matija Nalis
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 05:13:29PM -0400, Alex wrote:
> > Are there RBLs available that can be used to determine registrar or date
> of
> > registration? I understand the limits of querying a registrar but thought
> > there might be an RBL out
On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 05:13:29PM -0400, Alex wrote:
> Are there RBLs available that can be used to determine registrar or date of
> registration? I understand the limits of querying a registrar but thought
> there might be an RBL out there with this info?
https://spameatingmonkey.com/services
Hi,
Alex - Check out the FROM_FMBLA_NEWDOM rules. Are you seeing any emails
> hitting them?
>
Yes, got them, from here:
https://github.com/fmbla/spamassassin/blob/master/FMBLA.cf
Didn't hit.
Jul 8 18:02:53.537 [4189153] dbg: dnseval: checking [sendersrv.com] /
FROM_NEWDOMAIN_FMBLA / blfmbla /
Alex - Check out the FROM_FMBLA_NEWDOM rules. Are you seeing any emails
hitting them?
In my case, URIBL_RHS_DOB is no longer working at all. Is this still
working? - Mark
On 7/8/2024 5:13 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
I'm seeing emails from smartlendingclub dot com getting through that
are
On Thursday, July 04, 2024 02:01 AEST, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 15:54:
>
> > header AUTHRES_DKIM_PASS eval:check_authres_result('dkim', 'pass')
> > header USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST eval:check_for_dkim_whitelist_from()
>
> keep scores of them neutral
>
On Thursday, July 04, 2024 01:11 AEST, Bill Cole
wrote:
> On 2024-07-03 at 10:19:28 UTC-0400 (Thu, 04 Jul 2024 00:19:28 +1000)
> Simon Wilson via users
> is rumored to have said:
>
> > On 03.07.24 23:54, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
> >> Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:56:
>
On 03.07.24 23:54, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:56:
Do I also need to disable the normal SA DKIM plugin evaluation, i.e.
trusting my upstream authres_trusted_authserv only?
both works in paralel, so no need to disable, best results came from
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 07:48:
whitelist_auth supp...@wasabi.com
whitelist_auth *@mmemail.wasabi.com
its more simple to set From: "Simon" in mua
then both spf and dkim gives pass on same domain, note -d in dkim is not
same domain, so you need a new dkim sign key for
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 15:54:
header AUTHRES_DKIM_PASS eval:check_authres_result('dkim', 'pass')
header USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST eval:check_for_dkim_whitelist_from()
keep scores of them neutral
meta MY_DKIM_FAILS_NOTRUST (AUTHRES_DKIM_PASS && USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST)
Bill Cole skrev den 2024-07-03 17:11:
Not Currently Available For Hire
lol :)
back to sandbox, hehe
Matus UHLAR - fantomas skrev den 2024-07-03 16:14:
On 03.07.24 23:54, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:56:
Do I also need to disable the normal SA DKIM plugin evaluation, i.e.
trusting my upstream authres_trusted_authserv only?
both works in
On 2024-07-03 at 10:19:28 UTC-0400 (Thu, 04 Jul 2024 00:19:28 +1000)
Simon Wilson via users
is rumored to have said:
On 03.07.24 23:54, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:56:
Do I also need to disable the normal SA DKIM plugin evaluation, i.e.
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:56:
> Do I also need to disable the normal SA DKIM plugin evaluation, i.e.
> trusting my upstream authres_trusted_authserv only?
both works in paralel, so no need to disable, best results came from
both enabled
its up to you to add more
On 03.07.24 23:54, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
>Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:56:
>> Do I also need to disable the normal SA DKIM plugin evaluation, i.e.
>> trusting my upstream authres_trusted_authserv only?
>
>both works in paralel, so no need to disable, best results came
On 03.07.24 23:54, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:56:
Do I also need to disable the normal SA DKIM plugin evaluation, i.e.
trusting my upstream authres_trusted_authserv only?
both works in paralel, so no need to disable, best results came from
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:56:
> Do I also need to disable the normal SA DKIM plugin evaluation, i.e.
> trusting my upstream authres_trusted_authserv only?
both works in paralel, so no need to disable, best results came from
both enabled
its up to you to add more
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:56:
Do I also need to disable the normal SA DKIM plugin evaluation, i.e.
trusting my upstream authres_trusted_authserv only?
both works in paralel, so no need to disable, best results came from
both enabled
its up to you to add more
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:13:
> I don't think SA 3.4.6 on RH8 has AuthRes plugin:
take it from spamassassin trunc, this plugin works on 3.4.6 aswell, but
was not released or tested on it, i have verify it does work
#!/bin/sh
svn checkout
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 14:13:
I don't think SA 3.4.6 on RH8 has AuthRes plugin:
take it from spamassassin trunc, this plugin works on 3.4.6 aswell, but
was not released or tested on it, i have verify it does work
#!/bin/sh
svn checkout
On Wednesday, July 03, 2024 22:06 AEST, "Simon Wilson via users"
wrote:
Dave Funk skrev den 2024-07-03 09:29:
> On Wed, 3 Jul 2024, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
> You say "passing SPF and DKIM" however in the SA rules report it
> clearly says:
> DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_INVALID=0.1
>
>
Dave Funk skrev den 2024-07-03 09:29:
> On Wed, 3 Jul 2024, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
> You say "passing SPF and DKIM" however in the SA rules report it
> clearly says:
> DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_INVALID=0.1
>
> So eventho you think 'passed DKIM' SA clearly does NOT think it does.
> That
Simon Wilson via users skrev den 2024-07-03 09:48:
So I guess the question is why SA is not accepting a trusted header
with a DKIM pass recorded with the same mail path through the system?
I have no AuthRes settings set specifically in local.cf.
so add it :)
ifplugin
Dave Funk skrev den 2024-07-03 09:29:
On Wed, 3 Jul 2024, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
You say "passing SPF and DKIM" however in the SA rules report it
clearly says:
DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_INVALID=0.1
So eventho you think 'passed DKIM' SA clearly does NOT think it does.
That DKIM_INVALID
On Wed, 3 Jul 2024, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
> Does whitelist_auth work on From header, or Return-Path? Reason I ask:
>
>
>
> I have two emails from “support .at. wasabi.com”. Due to their emails usually
> triggering KAM rules I have (in
> /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf):
>
>
>
> ##
On Wed, 3 Jul 2024, Simon Wilson via users wrote:
Does whitelist_auth work on From header, or Return-Path? Reason I ask:
I have two emails from “support .at. wasabi.com”. Due to their emails usually
triggering KAM rules I have (in
/etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf):
## Whitelist Wasabi,
On 29.06.24 17:07, Rick Gutierrez wrote:
hi list , The latest version of spamassassin on Ubuntu 22.04 does not
exist or they did not create the deb package, someone on the list who
has the deb package and wants to share it.
https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=spamassassin
perhaps you
W dniu 2024-06-25 15:55, John Hardin napisał(a):
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024, Mark London wrote:
I received a spam email with the text below, that wasn't caught by
Spamassasin (at least mine). The text actually looks like something
that was generated using ChatGPT. In any event, I put the text
That is the way some email clients, say GroupWise does it. There is an option
to put all mail from new
receivers in the junk folder for perusal. OTOH should simple graylisting do the
same thing. But yes, an option
to deduct points from previously unseen senders would be useful.
--
Med vänlig
On 2024-06-25 at 17:38:28 UTC-0400 (Tue, 25 Jun 2024 17:38:28 -0400)
Mark London
is rumored to have said:
Bill - Thanks for the response. As an aside, it would be nice
(though impossible?) for a spam filter to be more suspicious of emails
coming from a new email address, that is not in my
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 05:38:28PM -0400, Mark London wrote:
> Bill - Thanks for the response. As an aside, it would be nice (though
> impossible?) for a spam filter to be more suspicious of emails coming from a
> new email address, that is not in my Sent folder or my Inbox. FWIW. - Mark
Bill - Thanks for the response. As an aside, it would be nice (though
impossible?) for a spam filter to be more suspicious of emails coming
from a new email address, that is not in my Sent folder or my Inbox.
FWIW. - Mark
On 6/25/2024 11:21 AM, Bill Cole wrote:
Mark London
is rumored to
On 6/25/24 12:21 PM, Adam Bowen wrote:
I asked a well known chatbot: What would Bill Cole say if he was asked
about integrating AI in to spamassassin?
LOL
I needed that laugh.
Thank you Adam.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
On 25/06/2024 16:21, Bill Cole wrote:
On 2024-06-24 at 17:18:11 UTC-0400 (Mon, 24 Jun 2024 17:18:11 -0400)
Mark London
is rumored to have said:
I received a spam email with the text below, that wasn't caught by
Spamassasin (at least mine). The text actually looks like something
that was
On 2024-06-24 at 17:18:11 UTC-0400 (Mon, 24 Jun 2024 17:18:11 -0400)
Mark London
is rumored to have said:
I received a spam email with the text below, that wasn't caught by
Spamassasin (at least mine). The text actually looks like something
that was generated using ChatGPT. In any event,
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024, Mark London wrote:
I received a spam email with the text below, that wasn't caught by
Spamassasin (at least mine). The text actually looks like something that
was generated using ChatGPT. In any event, I put the text through ChatGPT,
and asked if it looked like spam.
I'm very interested in the concept. I imagine you'd need to have a
locally running LLM rather than using an API, both for concerns of
privacy and performance. Even if not SpamAssassin, I'd love to find
anyone's open source implementation of AI for spam filtering.
On 2024-06-24 16:18, Mark
ubject: Re: BayesStore MariaDB on EL9
Hi,
for your information and anyone who comes across this problem: I have
opened an issue with RedHat.
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-43418
It probably will be backported, but may take some time, maybe in 9.5 or
possibly later.
We'll see...
Regards,
Hi,
for your information and anyone who comes across this problem: I have
opened an issue with RedHat.
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-43418
It probably will be backported, but may take some time, maybe in 9.5 or
possibly later.
We'll see...
Regards,
Gerald
On 19.06.24 08:41,
On 6/23/24 10:26 PM, Larry Nedry via users wrote:
On 7/21/23 9:10 AM, Giovanni Bechis wrote:
Hi,
phishstats[.]info domain has recently moved to a parking domain, if you are using
Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Phishing plugin with data downloaded from PhishStats[.]info
it would be better to
On 7/21/23 9:10 AM, Giovanni Bechis wrote:
Hi,
phishstats[.]info domain has recently moved to a parking domain, if
you are using Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Phishing plugin with data
downloaded from PhishStats[.]info it would be better to comment
"phishing_phishstats_feed" configuration line.
Paul Schmehl skrev den 2024-06-21 01:17:
bayes_path /usr/local/etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes/bayes
On 22.06.24 16:30, Benny Pedersen wrote:
this need spamd running as root :/
according to OP mail the directory is owned by spamd user
https://marc.info/?l=spamassassin-users=171891451702472=2
Paul Schmehl skrev den 2024-06-21 01:17:
bayes_path /usr/local/etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes/bayes
this need spamd running as root :/
bayes_path ~/.spamassassin/bayes
path is not a file, just a dir
expanded without ~ is in gentoo /var/lib/spamd
this support any system users, spamd homedir
Paul Schmehl skrev den 2024-06-22 07:44:
It’s not clear to me from your answer. Does SA read rules in both
places?
it eveal first sa-update rules, then later host rules
Or only in /etc/mail/spamassassin/?
this is host rules, you define all global configs here, and it will
never be
On Sat, 22 Jun 2024, Paul Schmehl wrote:
On Jun 22, 2024, at 12:28 AM, Kenneth Porter
wrote:
On 6/21/2024 8:56 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
I scratched my head, then looked up the man page for sa-update on the
web. Sure enough, that’s where the rules
go. Is that where my
> On Jun 22, 2024, at 12:28 AM, Kenneth Porter wrote:
>
> On 6/21/2024 8:56 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
>> I scratched my head, then looked up the man page for sa-update on the web.
>> Sure enough, that’s where the rules go. Is that where my local.cf file
>> should be located? Right now it’s in
On 6/21/2024 8:56 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
I scratched my head, then looked up the man page for sa-update on the
web. Sure enough, that’s where the rules go. Is that where my local.cf
file should be located? Right now it’s in /etc/mail/spamassassin.
There’s a default local.cf file in
> On Jun 21, 2024, at 8:24 AM, Bill Cole
> wrote:
>
> On 2024-06-20 at 19:17:19 UTC-0400 (Thu, 20 Jun 2024 18:17:19 -0500)
> Paul Schmehl
> is rumored to have said:
>
>> Here’s every line with bayes_ in it:
>> bayes_#auto_learn 1
>> bayes_learn_to_journal 1
>> bayes_path
Kris, thanks so much for the direction. It was enough for me to investigate
and make some changes. I hadn't realized I still had Paul Stead's rules
locally as well as updated rules in SA proper.
Thanks,
Alex
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 11:23 AM Kris Deugau wrote:
> Alex wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I
On 2024-06-20 at 19:17:19 UTC-0400 (Thu, 20 Jun 2024 18:17:19 -0500)
Paul Schmehl
is rumored to have said:
> Here’s every line with bayes_ in it:
> bayes_#auto_learn 1
> bayes_learn_to_journal 1
> bayes_path /usr/local/etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes/bayes
> bayes_file_mode 0775
>
> On Jun 20, 2024, at 6:05 PM, Bill Cole
> wrote:
>
> On 2024-06-20 at 16:14:47 UTC-0400 (Thu, 20 Jun 2024 15:14:47 -0500)
> Paul Schmehl mailto:paul.schm...@gmail.com>>
> is rumored to have said:
>
>> I’m running spamassassin (SA) 3.4, postfix 3.9.0-1, and dovecot 2.2.36-8 on
>> a linux
On 2024-06-20 at 16:14:47 UTC-0400 (Thu, 20 Jun 2024 15:14:47 -0500)
Paul Schmehl
is rumored to have said:
I’m running spamassassin (SA) 3.4, postfix 3.9.0-1, and dovecot
2.2.36-8 on a linux server. I have some questions about SA that I
can’t seem to find answers for on the web.
The SA conf
Alex wrote:
Hi,
I had an obit email very unfortunately get tagged as spam for what
appears to be the result of a few DKIMWL rules and MSGID_BELONGS_RECIPIENT.
* 1.0 DKIMWL_BULKMAILER_LOW ASKDNS: DKIMwl.org - Low scoring bulkmailer
*
On 2024-06-19 at 01:28:20 UTC-0400 (Wed, 19 Jun 2024 07:28:20 +0200)
Gerald Vogt
is rumored to have said:
Hi,
for testing I tried to install spamassassin 4.0.1 on EL9 (AlmaLinux
9.4). I have noticed some dependencies are not mentioned on the
INSTALL page:
I have had to install
On 18.06.24 22:23, Bill Cole wrote:
On 2024-06-18 at 14:58:15 UTC-0400 (Tue, 18 Jun 2024 20:58:15 +0200)
Gerald Vogt
is rumored to have said:
Hi,
for a test, I have increased the column length of token to binary(32)
and used a test file to import containing a single token.
This time it
On 2024-06-18 at 14:58:15 UTC-0400 (Tue, 18 Jun 2024 20:58:15 +0200)
Gerald Vogt
is rumored to have said:
Hi,
for a test, I have increased the column length of token to binary(32)
and used a test file to import containing a single token.
This time it went through. However, as I suspected,
Hi,
for a test, I have increased the column length of token to binary(32)
and used a test file to import containing a single token.
This time it went through. However, as I suspected, the token length is
not 5 byte. Token line from backup:
t 1 0 1718024618 027121926a
I'd also strongly recommend adding boundaries: /\b(blah1|blah2|blah3)\b/i
Otherwise, you might have a whole *pano*ply of words that will make
legit mails marked a spam. You need to be super sure about poison pills
rules, or in french - *pillu*le empoisonnée.
Good luck.
On 18.06.24 13:35, Axb
You need to enclose in brackets
body LOCAL_BLAH /(blah1|blah2|blah3)/i
On 6/18/24 13:05, Anders Gustafsson wrote:
Sure:
body LOCAL_PORN_RULE
/kiimainen|naida|sexikäs|nussikas|nussia|pillu|pano|kinky|bdsm|pillua|x69-JOOGA/i
score LOCAL_PORN_RULE 8
describe LOCAL_PORN_RULE This
On 18.06.24 14:05, Anders Gustafsson wrote:
body LOCAL_PORN_RULE
/kiimainen|naida|sexikäs|nussikas|nussia|pillu|pano|kinky|bdsm|pillua|x69-JOOGA/i
score LOCAL_PORN_RULE 8
describe LOCAL_PORN_RULE This catches peter's porn spam
Sorry again for mailing directly. No idea why it suggests
Sure:
body LOCAL_PORN_RULE
/kiimainen|naida|sexikäs|nussikas|nussia|pillu|pano|kinky|bdsm|pillua|x69-JOOGA/i
score LOCAL_PORN_RULE 8
describe LOCAL_PORN_RULE This catches peter's porn spam
Sorry again for mailing directly. No idea why it suggests the user and not
users@
--
Med vänlig
On 18.06.24 13:50, Anders Gustafsson wrote:
body LOCAL_PORN_RULE /word1|word2.|x69-JOOGA/i
score LOCAL_PORN_RULE 8
describe LOCAL_PORN_RULE This catches peter's porn spam
Funny thing is that it seems to trigger on messages that contain none of those
words. I have removed the
actual
Read the document. Upgraded. Ran sa-update (always forget that)
We really have a very simple setup, except for our homegrown integration wiith
our email system. So I added
enable_compat welcomelist_blocklist" to init.pre
Then did a search/replace of local.cf for all whitelist_from and
Anders Gustafsson skrev den 2024-06-16 13:42:
This one:
Return-path:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5 (2021-03-20) on xx
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-95.6 required=5.0
tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,
MIME_HTML_ONLY,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L5,RDNS_NONE,
On 16.06.24 14:42, Anders Gustafsson wrote:
Return-path:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5 (2021-03-20) on xx
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-95.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,
MIME_HTML_ONLY,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L5,RDNS_NONE,
Am 2024-06-14 21:20, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
If you want to find out more, feed the mail to "spamassassin -D" and
that should explain which text matched which rules.
and as we told you already, your client should NOT play with small
or semi-invisible text in mail. That's what spamers
On Fri, 14 Jun 2024, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 6/14/2024 10:39 AM, Thomas Barth via users wrote:
Hello,
I would like to explain a sender what he can do to create an email that is
not classified as spam.
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=6.248 tagged_above=1 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9,
On 2024-06-14 at 17:33:22 UTC-0400 (Fri, 14 Jun 2024 23:33:22 +0200)
Thomas Barth via users
is rumored to have said:
Am 2024-06-14 21:20, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
grep -ri "FONT_INVIS_NORDNS" /var/lib/spamassassin/ | grep describe
Am 2024-06-14 21:20, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
grep -ri "FONT_INVIS_NORDNS" /var/lib/spamassassin/ | grep describe
/var/lib/spamassassin/4.00/updates_spamassassin_org/72_active.cf:
describe FONT_INVIS_NORDNS Invisible text + no rDNS
In my case, I can say with certainty that the mail
Am 2024-06-14 18:24, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
1. as I said it's hard to find out without the body
2. hiding data indicates a spammer.
On 14.06.24 19:15, Thomas Barth via users wrote:
Yes, I've now realized that I can simply grep for the descriptions.
grep -ri "FONT_INVIS_NORDNS"
On 2024-06-14 at 10:39:36 UTC-0400 (Fri, 14 Jun 2024 16:39:36 +0200)
Thomas Barth via users
is rumored to have said:
Hello,
I would like to explain a sender what he can do to create an email
that is not classified as spam.
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=6.248 tagged_above=1 required=5
Am 2024-06-14 18:24, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
1. as I said it's hard to find out without the body
2. hiding data indicates a spammer.
Yes, I've now realized that I can simply grep for the descriptions.
grep -ri "FONT_INVIS_NORDNS" /var/lib/spamassassin/ | grep describe
Am 2024-06-14 17:11, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
FONT_INVIS_NORDNS=1.544
HTML_FONT_TINY_NORDNS=1.514
RDNS_NONE=0.793
working fcrdns would fix much for them.
However, not doing stupid shit with fonts would help even more:
FONT_INVIS_MSGID=2.497
FONT_INVIS_NORDNS=1.544
> On Jun 3, 2024, at 4:09 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> I forgot to add that I have "lowered" (increased to small negative number)
> scores for RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_*, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_* and RCVD_IN_IADB_*
> because I has similar bad experience with them.
Matus, if you EVER have a bad
On 6/14/2024 10:39 AM, Thomas Barth via users wrote:
Hello,
I would like to explain a sender what he can do to create an email
that is not classified as spam.
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=6.248 tagged_above=1 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
Am 2024-06-14 17:11, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
FONT_INVIS_NORDNS=1.544
HTML_FONT_TINY_NORDNS=1.514
RDNS_NONE=0.793
working fcrdns would fix much for them.
However, not doing stupid shit with fonts would help even more:
FONT_INVIS_MSGID=2.497
FONT_INVIS_NORDNS=1.544
On 15/06/2024 01:04, Thomas Barth via users wrote:
Am 2024-06-14 16:44, schrieb Reindl Harald (privat):
with RDNS_NONE nobody on this planet should accept mails from that
machine and the admin has to be fired, the message should be jejected
at SMTP level long before spamassassin
And you
Am 2024-06-14 16:44, schrieb Reindl Harald (privat):
with RDNS_NONE nobody on this planet should accept mails from that
machine and the admin has to be fired, the message should be jejected
at SMTP level long before spamassassin
And you would have been dismissed because of your pathological
On 14.06.24 16:39, Thomas Barth via users wrote:
I would like to explain a sender what he can do to create an email
that is not classified as spam.
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=6.248 tagged_above=1 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,
On 13/06/2024 08:59, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
Yesterday I disabled DKIM as a spam indicator, because I got tired of
adding exceptions. Non-compliant relays should fail hard, but they do
not. This is a tragedy.
I have NFI why you wasted your time telling us this
DKIM only proves it was
On 2024-06-08 14:45:34, Bill Cole wrote:
I went looking for a better fix and found a reported issue at
https://github.com/SpamExperts/pyzor/issues/155 matching my original
symptoms in which a workaround was provided: install directly from
the GitHub project's master.zip link, i.e. a snapshot
he.org
Subject: Re: Warning: Your Pyzor may be broken.
On 10-06-2024 15:05, giova...@paclan.it wrote:
> On 6/9/24 7:31 PM, John Hardin wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Jun 2024, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-06-08 14:45:34, Bill Cole wrote:
>>>
>>>> I went
On 10-06-2024 15:05, giova...@paclan.it wrote:
On 6/9/24 7:31 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Sun, 9 Jun 2024, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On 2024-06-08 14:45:34, Bill Cole wrote:
I went looking for a better fix and found a reported issue at
https://github.com/SpamExperts/pyzor/issues/155 matching
On 6/9/24 7:31 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Sun, 9 Jun 2024, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On 2024-06-08 14:45:34, Bill Cole wrote:
I went looking for a better fix and found a reported issue at
https://github.com/SpamExperts/pyzor/issues/155 matching my original
symptoms in which a workaround was
On Sun, 9 Jun 2024, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On 2024-06-08 14:45:34, Bill Cole wrote:
I went looking for a better fix and found a reported issue at
https://github.com/SpamExperts/pyzor/issues/155 matching my original
symptoms in which a workaround was provided: install directly from
the GitHub
On 2024-06-08 14:45:34, Bill Cole wrote:
> I went looking for a better fix and found a reported issue at
> https://github.com/SpamExperts/pyzor/issues/155 matching my original
> symptoms in which a workaround was provided: install directly from
> the GitHub project's master.zip link, i.e. a
On 2024-06-08 at 15:35:01 UTC-0400 (Sat, 08 Jun 2024 21:35:01 +0200)
Benny Pedersen
is rumored to have said:
> Bill Cole skrev den 2024-06-08 20:45:
>
>> I've chosen #3 for myself, but it's not great.
>
> is why cpanel provided a perl pyzor client ?
I had forgotten about that. Thank you, Benny.
Bill Cole skrev den 2024-06-08 20:45:
I've chosen #3 for myself, but it's not great.
is why cpanel provided a perl pyzor client ?
ifplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Pyzor
use_pyzor 1
pyzor_count_min 1
pyzor_welcomelist_min 1
pyzor_welcomelist_factor 0.2
pyzor_fork 0
Am 07.06.24 um 23:33 schrieb Bill Cole:
You do not even need to do that.
All SORBS-referencing rules were removed from the updates.spamasssassin.org
rules channel earlier this week. Scanning the latest deployed (by sa-update)
version r1918114 I see no surviving references to SORBS.
since
On 2024-06-06 at 19:53:02 UTC-0400 (Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:53:02 -0400)
J Doe
is rumored to have said:
[...]
> Hi Rob and list,
>
> Speaking as a small user of SORBS via SpamAssassin 4.0, I assume the
> correct response to disable use of SORBS is to place the following in my
> local.cf file:
>
>
On 2024-06-06 at 12:08:54 UTC-0400 (Thu, 6 Jun 2024 18:08:54 +0200)
is rumored to have said:
> Thanks for your answer Harald.
>
> Regarding "there is no such configuration option in SpamAssassin": The conf
> snipplet I posted below comes from the repository, however it's an older
> version,
On 06.06.24 21:17, hostmas...@audiogen.ch wrote:
I just got the latest rules.
I'm okay with poor performance for some of the rules as there isn't much
load on the related system.
And yes, you're right, on Ubuntu 20.04.06 the rules are installed in
/usr/share/spamassassin.
sa-update has placed
Thanks for the reply.
I will try to register it in bugzilla little by little.
2024-06-03 17:04 に giova...@paclan.it さんは書きました:
On 6/3/24 1:10 AM, Tomohiro Hosaka wrote:
Slight correction.
2024-06-03 07:55 に Tomohiro Hosaka さんは書きました:
Here $rc is dualvar.
https://metacpan.org/pod/DBI#execute
On 2024-06-05 04:44, Rob McEwen via users wrote:
From "Frido Otten" mailto:fr...@0tten.nl>>
So is there anything that needs to be done to prevent false positives
happening right after the shutdown?
They said they were emptying the zone files, not actually "listing the
world" - so this
hostmas...@audiogen.ch wrote:
I found the related
configuration in 20_dnsbl_tests.cf:
/#
---/
/# Return Path Certified:/
/# https://www.returnpath.net/internetserviceprovider/certification//
/# (replaces
On 6/5/24 13:14, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 2024-06-03 at 08:35:32 UTC-0400 (Mon, 3 Jun 2024 14:35:32 +0200)
postgarage Graz IT
is rumored to have said:
I think that the active.list file should be updated, when there
are new rules, shouldn't it?
On 03.06.24 08:52, Bill Cole wrote:
On 2024-06-03 at 08:35:32 UTC-0400 (Mon, 3 Jun 2024 14:35:32 +0200)
postgarage Graz IT
is rumored to have said:
I think that the active.list file should be updated, when
there are new rules, shouldn't it?
On 03.06.24 08:52, Bill Cole wrote:
It is updated where it is actually used, on the ASF
On 6/5/24 11:14, postgarage Graz IT wrote:
On 6/5/24 09:17, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 2024-06-03 at 08:35:32 UTC-0400 (Mon, 3 Jun 2024 14:35:32 +0200)
postgarage Graz IT
is rumored to have said:
I think that the active.list file should be updated, when there are
new rules,
On 6/5/24 09:17, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 2024-06-03 at 08:35:32 UTC-0400 (Mon, 3 Jun 2024 14:35:32 +0200)
postgarage Graz IT
is rumored to have said:
I think that the active.list file should be updated, when there are
new rules, shouldn't it?
On 03.06.24 08:52, Bill Cole wrote:
From "Frido Otten"
So is there anything that needs to be done to prevent false positives
happening right after the shutdown?
They said they were emptying the zone files, not actually "listing the
world" - so this shouldn't cause false any positives - but might cause
some false negatives,
Nothing will *need* to be done.SORBS *should* be removed from all configurations at the earliest opportunity.SORBS will be shut down properly with the DNS servers and zones returning delagation and empty zones for multiple years (should be 10+.. but that depends on whether Proofpoint exists in 10
1 - 100 of 88634 matches
Mail list logo
