search for: bogofilter

...t; It seems to be happening when I use vnd.dovecot.filter. When I comment >>>> out the block, things come through fine. >>>> >>>> My filter block looks like this: >>>> ?????? require "vnd.dovecot.filter"; >>>> ?????? filter "bogofilter_filter"; >>>> >>>> ??????? if header :contains "X-Bogosity" [ >>>> ??????????????? "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=1.00", >>>> ??????????????? "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.99" >>>> ??????? ] {...

...ncoming PDFs are getting mangled. >> It seems to be happening when I use vnd.dovecot.filter. When I comment >> out the block, things come through fine. >> >> My filter block looks like this: >> require "vnd.dovecot.filter"; >> filter "bogofilter_filter"; >> >> if header :contains "X-Bogosity" [ >> "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=1.00", >> "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.99" >> ] { >> fileinto "spam...

Since upgrading to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming PDFs are getting mangled. It seems to be happening when I use vnd.dovecot.filter. When I comment out the block, things come through fine. My filter block looks like this: require "vnd.dovecot.filter"; filter "bogofilter_filter"; if header :contains "X-Bogosity" [ "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=1.00", "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.99" ] { fileinto "spam/totally"; stop; } e...

...mangled. >>> It seems to be happening when I use vnd.dovecot.filter. When I comment >>> out the block, things come through fine. >>> >>> My filter block looks like this: >>> require "vnd.dovecot.filter"; >>> filter "bogofilter_filter"; >>> >>> if header :contains "X-Bogosity" [ >>> "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=1.00", >>> "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.99" >>> ] { >>>...

...ppening when I use vnd.dovecot.filter. When I comment >>>>> out the block, things come through fine. >>>>> >>>>> My filter block looks like this: >>>>> ?????? require "vnd.dovecot.filter"; >>>>> ?????? filter "bogofilter_filter"; >>>>> >>>>> ??????? if header :contains "X-Bogosity" [ >>>>> ??????????????? "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=1.00", >>>>> ??????????????? "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.99" >>>&...

...39;s source code, I decided to use Dovecot's LDA, because it supports sieve via a plugin. All in all it worked after some tweaking and Dovecot is now responsible for authentication and delivery. Furthermore I want to setup a spam filter and due to the memory constraints I decided in favour of bogofilter (I made no real world tests, but the authors claim that it's fast and has a small memory footprint). My first idea was train bogofilter via a cronjob that runs bogofilter for each E-Mail in my spam folder and deletes them afterwards. Then I stumbled upon the dovecot antispam [2] plugin and qu...

Hello, Sorry for a bit offtopic but it seems the bogofilter community is just as dead as dspam is. I trying to switch from DSPAM to bogofilter on a server where if I turn bogofilter on I run into the following issue: Certain users have sender and recipient bcc maps setup in postfix. This is for forwarding copy of an email to other address for example:...

DEBIAN package information: ii dovecot-common 0.99.11-3 ii dovecot-imapd 0.99.11-3 ii bogofilter 0.93.1-1 Apologies for cross-posting, but I think the problem lies somewhere in here. Maybe someone can tell me something useful. Now, I've confirmed the following: I received a mail message that was not spam, of size 2132 originally. clamav scanned it and bumped the size up to 2356 (ad...

...lter RFC, I was expecting the implicit keep to retain >> the filtered version. Am I misinterpreting the spec? > > I did a quick test, and I am not seeing any problems. > > However, what is that spamheaders test in your script? Hi Stephan, The block looks like this: ### BOGOFILTER filter "bogofilter_filter"; if header :contains "X-Bogosity" [ "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=1.00", "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.99" ] { fileinto "spam/totally";...

...ng to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming PDFs are getting mangled. > It seems to be happening when I use vnd.dovecot.filter. When I comment > out the block, things come through fine. > > My filter block looks like this: > require "vnd.dovecot.filter"; > filter "bogofilter_filter"; > > if header :contains "X-Bogosity" [ > "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=1.00", > "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.99" > ] { > fileinto "spam/totally"; >...

I'm using maildrop to filter mail like: xfilter "/usr/bin/spamc" xfilter "/usr/bin/bogofilter -ep" I want to change to deliver (so I can use sieve) but can deliver do this?

# 2.2.12: /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf # OS: Linux 3.15.4-x86_64-linode45 x86_64 openSUSE 12.3 (x86_64) Short version: 1) I filter out spam by using a dovecot sieve filter to act based on a header inserted by bogofilter 2) In some cases, sieve fails to correctly file based on this header 3) Testing with sieve-test indicates that it's testing the wrong header 4) Suggestions? Am I doing something wrong? Is there a problem with these headers that bends test-sieve out of shape? 5) Test files from below are also...

Op 6/15/2017 om 12:19 PM schreef Luescher Claude: > I have +vnd.dovecot.duplicate plugin enabled but it seems to be > ineffective. Any other tips for a workaround? > Enabling that extension does nothing by itself. You need to add a corresponding rule to your Sieve script. Also, that is the deprecated name for that extension. It is explained fully here:

Hello, Yes but how to activate this for all users, not on a per user basis or without writing out thousands of sieve files to users directories. Thank you. On 2017-06-15 13:33, Stephan Bosch wrote: > Op 6/15/2017 om 12:19 PM schreef Luescher Claude: >> I have +vnd.dovecot.duplicate plugin enabled but it seems to be >> ineffective. Any other tips for a workaround? >> >

...retain >>> the filtered version. Am I misinterpreting the spec? >> >> I did a quick test, and I am not seeing any problems. >> >> However, what is that spamheaders test in your script? > > Hi Stephan, > > The block looks like this: > > ??????? ### BOGOFILTER > ??????? filter "bogofilter_filter"; > > ??????? if header :contains "X-Bogosity" [ > ??????????????? "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=1.00", > ??????????????? "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.99" > ??????? ] { > ??????????? filein...

Hi, what is the point of adding an empty argument to the command called by the "executable = script ..." setting in a service? I guess that would be the call to array_append_space at line 57 in util/script.c. Background is that I'm trying to run bogofilter through the extprograms Pigeonhole plugin. So I've defined a service entry with a unix_listener and wondered why my test shell script works but bogofilter exits with a cryptic error. Turns out that this empty argument at the end trips up the bogofilter argument parsing code. If I manually call...

I'm getting a behaviour with pigeonhole that I wasn't expecting. Am I misunderstanding the design? I run my messages through a vnd.dovecot.filter. It's essentially this: filter "spam_filter"; if spamheaders { fileinto "spam"; stop; } Mail stored in the spam folder is the filtered version, but the implicit-keep message is the original, unfiltered

Can someone suggest anything that will help with the following ext3 performance problem? (It's a Berkeley db issue at bottom, but the ext3 part is worth looking at, I think.) First, two paragraphs of background: A Bayesian spam filter called bogofilter uses Berkeley db to maintain two database files of identical format: one containing words found in spam email and for each word the number of times that word has been seen; the other is the same except the words come from nonspam email. ("Words" is a bit of an oversimplification but that...

..., I have a couple of questions for which I haven't found answers in the docs (which may be well more a limitation of my capabilities than anything else). Here they go: - Is it OK to move mailboxes around from under Dovecot? Case in point: I'm using procmail to pass incoming mail through bogofilter (the standard recipe mentioned in their manpage, which more or less funnels spam into a "spam" mailbox, unsure into an "unsure" and non-spam into "inbox"). From time to time I'd like to clear the spam and unsure mailboxes, using logrotate. Dovecot seems to cope wit...

for Spam. In the process of setting up a more effective spam filtering system, I just noticed that bogofilter, which implements extensions of the (a?) "Naive Bayes" text classification approach, will dump out R data frames; the man page suggests how to "integrate" it with R for verification. (sort of, that is). Anyway, for those of you looking for silly and perhaps interesting proble...