bohunu

[Niels Przybilla <np...@web.de>]

Hi,

is somebody here using bohunu.com

Is it worth testing it ?

BR Niels

RE: bohunu

[Michael Hutchinson <mh...@manux.co.nz>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris [mailto:cpollock@embarqmail.com]
> Sent: 4 December 2008 3:39 p.m.
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: bohunu
> 
> On Wednesday 03 December 2008 7:01 pm, Michael Hutchinson wrote:
> 
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was using Pyzor until about 2 months ago. It was quite good then,
I
> > don't think I ever got a False Positive with it, and it did stop a
lot
> > of Spam - not as much as Razor, but still significant. I had to take
it
> > offline as I was getting timeouts doing E-Mail scanning. I have not
> > tried the new version yet - I badly want to, but our Mail server
sits on
> > Debian Sarge, and there is no way I can run the Binary of Bohuno as
it
> > requires a version of SSL I cannot use in Sarge.
> > Hopefully someone can try it on a more recent distro, and provide
some
> > information as to whether it is any good or not.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mike
> 
> The old Pyzor is still working at least for me:
> 
> X-Spam-Pyzor: Reported 20 times.
> 
> Are you using this in your 'servers' file
> 
> 82.94.255.100:24441
> [chris@cpollock ~]$ pyzor ping
> 82.94.255.100:24441     (200, 'OK')
> 

Yes, and that all works fine. I think the problem was more to do with
how many times we were doing lookups per [segment of time]. Disabling it
and re-enabling it later would allow it to work again, but then timeouts
would set in later in the day - Bohuno sounds like it may solve this
problem by downloading a database of message digests regularly, instead
of doing a network lookup for every E-Mail that is checked. This is
exactly what I wanted to do with Pyzor anyway, now with Bohuno it's just
a matter of when management will let me upgrade the server.

Cheers,
Mike

Re: bohunu

[Chris <cp...@embarqmail.com>]

On Wednesday 03 December 2008 7:01 pm, Michael Hutchinson wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
> I was using Pyzor until about 2 months ago. It was quite good then, I
> don't think I ever got a False Positive with it, and it did stop a lot
> of Spam - not as much as Razor, but still significant. I had to take it
> offline as I was getting timeouts doing E-Mail scanning. I have not
> tried the new version yet - I badly want to, but our Mail server sits on
> Debian Sarge, and there is no way I can run the Binary of Bohuno as it
> requires a version of SSL I cannot use in Sarge.
> Hopefully someone can try it on a more recent distro, and provide some
> information as to whether it is any good or not.
>
> Cheers,
> Mike

The old Pyzor is still working at least for me:

X-Spam-Pyzor: Reported 20 times.

Are you using this in your 'servers' file

82.94.255.100:24441
[chris@cpollock ~]$ pyzor ping
82.94.255.100:24441     (200, 'OK')

-- 
Chris
KeyID 0xE372A7DA98E6705C

RE: bohunu

[Michael Hutchinson <mh...@manux.co.nz>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Niels Przybilla [mailto:nprzybilla@web.de]
> Sent: 3 December 2008 6:01 p.m.
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: bohunu
> 
> Hi,
> 
> is somebody here using bohunu.com
> 
> Is it worth testing it ?
> 
> BR Niels


Hello,

I was using Pyzor until about 2 months ago. It was quite good then, I
don't think I ever got a False Positive with it, and it did stop a lot
of Spam - not as much as Razor, but still significant. I had to take it
offline as I was getting timeouts doing E-Mail scanning. I have not
tried the new version yet - I badly want to, but our Mail server sits on
Debian Sarge, and there is no way I can run the Binary of Bohuno as it
requires a version of SSL I cannot use in Sarge. 
Hopefully someone can try it on a more recent distro, and provide some
information as to whether it is any good or not.

Cheers,
Mike