Amazing amount of SPAM getting through

[Julian Field]

Yes. Do not use their RPM. There is fundamentally no way that an RPM of
Perl modules can know where it should be installed. The only time it can
know is when the RPM is built. This is precisely why MailScanner's
install.sh script rebuilds each RPM before installing it.

Download the .tar.gz and install it by hand. I posted yesterday the list of
commands required to do this. Search yesterday's postings from me for
"Mail-SpamAssassin-2.55".

At 18:34 20/08/2003, you wrote:
>any reason not to install their rpm(assuming the one you can download from
>spamassassin.org)??
>
>-rob
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Julian Field [mailto:mailscanner at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK]
>Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 9:35 AM
>To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
>Subject: Re: Amazing amount of SPAM getting through
>
>
>The short answer to all this is "Yes, you really do want to use the latest
>version of SpamAssassin". Don't install it from their RPM, download the
>.tar.gz and build it by hand. It's only a few commands....
>
>          tar xzf Mail-SpamAssassin-2.55.tar.gz
>          cd Mail-SpamAssassin-2.55
>          perl Makefile.PL
>          make
>          make test
>          make install
>then set "Use SpamAssassin = yes" in your MailScanner.conf and restart
>MailScanner.
>
>Simple as that.
>
>At 13:06 20/08/2003, you wrote:
> >Last night I set our MailScanner machine to handle 100% of our e-mail
> >traffic.  It immediately began sifting through our e-mails.  I was
>surprised
> >by three things:
> >
> >1).  We get much more e-mail than I expected - about 600 a day from the
> >looks of it.
> >2).  That Sobig.F is moving so quickly - MailScanner caught 44 different
> >e-mails with it yesterday evening. (YAY MailScanner!)
> >3).  Out of the 600 or so e-mails, only 10 or so have been flagged as
> >"Spam".
> >
> >I can confirm No. 3 with a simple example - my mailbox.  When I arrived
>this
> >morning, I had 10 e-mails waiting on me.  Of those 10, 9 were SPAM.
> >MailScanner had only flagged (modified the Subject line with "{Spam}") 2 of
> >them.  If this dispersal is "typical" (which I doubt) that means that
> >approximately 78% of the SPAM we get is getting through MailScanner.
> >
> >Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to be able to handle the 22% we are getting,
> >but this is nothing like the 95% claim that I've seen touted about.
> >
> >I truly believe this is because of my configuration.  I'm using the stock
> >DNSBLs and rulesets that come with MailScanner 4.22-5.  I have been to
> >http://www.declude.com/JunkMail/Support/ip4r.htm and looked at additional
> >DNSBLs to add, but not sure which of those would be the best.  Any
> >suggestions?
> >
> >Another question I have concerns SpamAssassin (SA).  Would my SPAM
>detection
> >rates go up if I include SA to the mix?  Do I need SA to get the 95% rate?
> >
> >--
> >Kevin L. Collins, MCSE
> >Systems Manager
> >Nesbitt Engineering, Inc.
>
>--
>Julian Field
>www.MailScanner.info
>MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support

--
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support