Daniel is correct, he gets a cookie! The the others: please learn to recognize when you have no clue.
We've been having the same problem here for the last three days. I tracked it down to BAYES_999. Glad to see other people are suffering as much as I am. :) Simon Le 2014-02-19 01:46, Daniel Staal a écrit : > --As of February 19, 2014 9:52:57 AM +0800, Randy Bush is alleged to > have said: > >> in the last 3-4 days, a *massive* amount of spam is making it past >> spamassassin to my users and to me. see appended for example. not >> all has dkim. >> >> clue? > > --As for the rest, it is mine. > > The spamassassin list has been tracking an issue where a new rule made > it out of the testbox accidentally, which lowers scores on a lot of > spam. It wasn't in the sample you provided, but the rule name is > BAYES_999 - it catches mail that the bayes filter thinks is 99.9-100% > sure to be spam. As it got promoted prematurely, it's showing with a > score of 1.0. (The default.) It's probably a part of your problem. > > A fix should be in the rules update today or tomorrow - or you can > rescore it to the same as BAYES_99 (someplace in the 3 range by default, > I believe). That's what used to catch that mail: it used to mean > 99-100%, and now means 99-99.9%. > > More info can be found in the mailing list archives for the spamassassin > list. > > Daniel T. Staal -- DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca NAT64/DNS64 open-source --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca STUN/TURN server --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
