efa-project.org

Rather than change the scores, I'd try to find out why the system wasn't marking them as spam in the first place. When I first had my installation running, a lot of my blacklist/spamlist checks weren't actually running because of how my DNS server was configured. Like you, a lot of spam game through...

the kam.cf does seem to generate a lot of false positives. There are number of posts about this. Like this one for example: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1388

(Catching up on old posts after having been away for a while) My thought is to leave the scanning of outgoing mail on. Why? If someone inside the organization has their computer infected with junk and that junk is being email out, I want to know about it. If I could *absolutely* trust the internal u...

What about continuing with Centos 6? After all, it will be supported for another couple of years.

Sean,

What is the purpose for this backup file? Is it supposed to include all the local configuration files?

If so, then could you include /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf?

Are you still having this problem?

That's a good idea.

not had a chance to test for you last night. I'll try to squeeze it in tonight.

let me arrange a test as I have dkim keys posted.

it'll be a couple of hours before I can test

ps: you might want to edit out your email address above.

maybe.

it depends on the setup of the receiving system.

do you still have my address? send me a message from on of those other servers and let's see what happens exactly.

My understanding is dkim only provides additional verification that the mail is authentic and should be trusted. Unlike spf, dkim is just another bit of information that allows you to decide if the message is spam or not. spf allows you to either do nothing, accept the mail from "invalid" ...

What do you mean, " this cut other servers that send mail with my domain"?

Which servers stop receiving your mail sent from the other servers after enabling dkim? Your efa servers, or other people's servers?

(Others, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) 1/ if you want, it's configurable. 2/ yes, and yes. Your choice 3/ yes, maybe. You can whitelist domains so they avoid the spam check. That's not the same as saying, "let everything through, except gmail, yahoo..., which must be checked. 4/ yes. EF...

I'm following the issue on the mailscanner mailing list. If they discover something, I'll post the results back here.

Hi,

I've two, possibly stupid, questions for you

1/ did you restart mailscanner afterwards?

2/ how do you know it didn't work?

I've found a bug in mailscanner I believe. One of the users was having his mail rejected from yahoo with the following error #5.0.0 smtp; 554 Message not allowed - Headers are not RFC compliant[291]> #SMTP# I had to "solve" the problem by routing the mail directly, rather than through the ...

Hi Shawn, I just caught on the mailwatch database that the default webbug replacement for MailScanner points to the MailWatch mail servers. EFA is configured with: Web Bug Replacement = http://dl.efa-project.org/static/1x1spacer.gif Possible suggestion: During the installation process, you might wan...

check your pm. There will be an address for you.

- Paul

That's much better.

Now we just have to replace your O(N^2) algorithm with an O(N) version.

Eeek. That's a bit ugly, reading your output and rewriting it at the same time in multiple passes.

I'm pretty sure there is a way we can use sed to do it in one pass using some of sed's more advanced options. I'll see if I can puzzle out the syntax required.

thank you zohman, I appreciate the help you've been giving.

Like I said, I don't know perl, and I don't know your dataset, so my suggestion could break under different circumstances. If so, let me know and I'll find a fix.

1/ show me an example of your input that fails. Give me the smallest test case you can create that does not sort correctly

2/ what environment (shell version, OS) are you running it under?

I really should look at those menu's in more detail, shouldn't I?

In the meantime, another possible way might be to use fail2ban to monitor the mail log to watch for those frequent abusers and then have it configure iptables to block/allow/rate limit those IPs on the fly.