[H-GEN] Spam Assassin
Jason Parker-Burlingham
jasonp at uq.net.au
Wed Oct 23 13:46:14 EDT 2002
[ Humbug *General* list - semi-serious discussions about Humbug and ]
[ Unix-related topics. Posts from non-subscribed addresses will vanish. ]
Tony Nugent <tony at linuxworks.com.au> writes:
> On Tue Oct 22 2002 at 16:20, Jason Parker-Burlingham wrote:
> > Cor. This is a pretty nice bit of software. I installed it a few
> SpamAssassin? Yes it is, very nice. It is also easy to install and
> keep updated ("perl -MCPAN -e "install Mail::SpamAssassin", 2.43 is
> the current version).
You're talking to someone who just a few days before took the almost
unprecedented step of installing Perl modules into /usr/local rather
than waiting for them to be packaged as he wanted them. I haven't
seen anything to suggest that 2.20 (the version I'm using) has any
show-stopping bugs, have you?
(Seriously. I'm running stable, and would prefer to keep it that
way[1]. Am I running something that's likely to break?)
> I'm also using it as part of a mail filtering subsystem that plugs
> right into sendmail itself (called mimedefang), and this filter is
> catching spam very, very nicely (along with viruses and other
> "undesirable" emails).
Right. The rest of your message---which is full of good advice---is
predicated on two things, as far as I can tell: 1) that I'm getting
enough mail that I need better performance from SA and 2) that I want
to scan for viruses.
Well, I get mail via pop when I dial up, and maybe once a week or two
some mailing list or another will have a flurry of activity, and I'll
receive 100 messages all at once, at which point exim is configured to
simply queue them for later delivery. I haven't noticed any unduly
high load so far, and don't really expect to.
Second, until I'm serving a network (this is just a single-user
machine right now) I don't see a need for virus scanning or
de-spamming other peoples' email.
> And calling spamassassin itself directly for each message is very
> expensive on system resources... I've seen peak cpu loads hit 100%
> when doing it like this.
Wow! I'm running the local tests only, but I can't see that that
would have much effect. I simply haven't seen SA being so
... aggressive.
> A much better way to do this is to have spamd running as a daemon
> (it listens on a local socket),
Please tell me it's a UNIX domain socket?
> | spamc -p 2222
Oh, bugger. I'm assuming that's a port number.
> The first test is a sanity check, emails over ~100k are rarely
> spam and checking them is both resource-expensive and pointless.
>
> I already have spamd running on port 2222, started from my
> ~/.bash_profile script (if it isn't aleady running).
Well, at least it isn't running as root.
To be honest, I am alarmed that SA does not turn on Perl's taint
checks (indeed, bug reports indicate it's not taint-clean).
> "formail -s" is a very useful thing that I've used myself on many
> occasions to split apart mailbox files and re-sort its contents :)
Yes. It would have been worth installing procmail just to have
formail ready.
> And then there's Anomy::HTMLCleaner, which can do more magic... :)
I wasn't able to find that with the CPAN shell. What is it?
jason
Footnotes:
[1] I'm using a number of services I haven't used extensively before,
and it's all working *wonderfully* for a change, so I would
rather not do an upgrade until I know it's a bit more solid.
(Besides, until just a few days ago I had another user who didn't
respond well to changes of any kind.) I'm still in the middle of
reconfiguring.
--
||----|---|------------|--|-------|------|-----------|-#---|-|--|------||
| ``Ooooaah! |
| I'm getting so excited about cheese-making I can't stand it!'' |
||--|--------|--------------|----|-------------|------|---------|-----|-|
--
* This is list (humbug) general handled by majordomo at lists.humbug.org.au .
* Postings to this list are only accepted from subscribed addresses of
* lists 'general' or 'general-post'. See http://www.humbug.org.au/
More information about the General
mailing list