search for: bogosities

# 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

> On 21 Dec, 2017, at 14:37, Stephan Bosch <stephan at rename-it.nl> wrote: > > Op 12/19/2017 om 8:41 AM schreef Adam Weinberger: >> 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

Hello I have implemented recently in my work bogofilter utility to mark messages as Spam or Ham, currently is working perfectly, but I want to move those messages marked as spam to a folder called spam. I installed dovecot-sieve with the intention of using fileinto to accomplish this. my question is: where I put this: require "fileinto"; if header :contains "X-Bogosity"

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,

Op 12/22/2017 om 3:43 AM schreef Adam Weinberger: >> On 21 Dec, 2017, at 14:37, Stephan Bosch <stephan at rename-it.nl> wrote: >> >> Op 12/19/2017 om 8:41 AM schreef Adam Weinberger: >>> I'm getting a behaviour with pigeonhole that I wasn't expecting. Am I >>> misunderstanding the design? >>> >>> I run my messages through a

> On 19 Jan, 2018, at 4:39, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: > > > > On 19.01.2018 04:35, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> 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

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

Op 1/20/2018 om 11:01 PM schreef Adam Weinberger: >> On 20 Jan, 2018, at 10:05, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote: >> >> >>> On 19 Jan, 2018, at 4:39, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 19.01.2018 04:35, Adam Weinberger wrote: >>>> Since upgrading to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming

got a centos5.2 web/database server thats on a public coloc, its dmesg fills up with TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 82.135.195.32:64905/8032 shrinks window 354477433:354478918. Repaired. TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 82.135.195.32:64905/8032 shrinks window 354477433:354478918. Repaired. TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 82.135.195.32:64905/8032 shrinks window 354477433:354478918. Repaired. TCP:

On 19.01.2018 04:35, Adam Weinberger wrote: > 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"; > >

> On 20 Jan, 2018, at 10:05, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote: > > >> On 19 Jan, 2018, at 4:39, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 19.01.2018 04:35, Adam Weinberger wrote: >>> Since upgrading to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming PDFs are getting mangled. >>> It seems to be happening when I use

Op 1/21/2018 om 4:34 PM schreef Stephan Bosch: > Op 1/20/2018 om 11:01 PM schreef Adam Weinberger: >>> On 20 Jan, 2018, at 10:05, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 19 Jan, 2018, at 4:39, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 19.01.2018 04:35,

----- Forwarded message from Klaus Dittrich <kladit@t-online.de> ----- From: kladit@t-online.de (Klaus Dittrich) Subject: files of length zero Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:08:47 +0100 To: mbp@samba.org User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=0.10.2 Hi Martin, MS-Windows users here sometimes make the expierience to become files of length zero when

I use a lot of plus-style addresses (me+stuff at example.com), except I use underscore as the separator rather than plus (me_stuff at example.com). My mail logs are full of messages where dovecot looks for a mailbox named "stuff", fails, then delivers to my inbox. Is there a way to turn that off so that dovecot automatically delivers to my inbox? Thanks! Here are the details: >

Hi, on my small Xen-virtualised server with 48 MiB RAM I use Postfix and Dovecot, because the Debian administrators dislike qmail [1], which is in my opinion despite some maintainability and code quality issues a quite well designed software, because it mostly follows the UNIX principles. Postfix is not able to sort my E-Mail into different Maildir folders and after I looked at procmail's

Peter, FYI, I am interested in dragon-egg because I have been preparing updated llvm/llvm-gcc42 2.7 packaging for fink and was considering adding in an addition dragon-egg package if the additional gcc patch didn't destablize gcc45. Also I am really interested in checking the Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks for gcc 4.5.0 with and without dragon-egg. The Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks improved about

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

----- Forwarded message from Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com> ----- From: Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com> Organization: Codefidence ltd. A name you can trust. To: Linux-IL <linux-il@linux.org.il> Subject: [Announcement] Asterisk-IL mailing list X-Bogosity: Unsure [50.0%] X-listar-version: Listar v0.124a X-original-sender: gilad@benyossef.com X-list: linux-il

From bulia@dr.com Thu Nov 14 18:29:06 2002 Return-Path: <bulia@dr.com> Delivered-To: rsync@lists.samba.org Received: from ws1-10.us4.outblaze.com (205-158-62-111.outblaze.com [205.158.62.111]) by lists.samba.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B03132C052 for <rsync@lists.samba.org>; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 13:29:05 -0500 (EST) Received: (qmail 36819 invoked by uid 1001); 14 Nov 2002 18:29:04 -0000

Please don't send questions to the postmaster. ----- Forwarded message from ibnu muhd <jaguhkampung@yahoo.com> ----- From: ibnu muhd <jaguhkampung@yahoo.com> Subject: about samba problem Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:20:28 -0800 (PST) To: mailman-owner@lists.samba.org X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000230, version=0.9.1.2 --- hello ! i'am a new linux user from