Re: [SAtalk] sa-learn question
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:43:20 -0500 Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 08:27:03AM -0600, Bob Apthorpe wrote: > > They're only in 2.50; 2.50 should be released in a week or two. > > FYI: The "official" answer is sometime Q1 2003. :) We're still doing > bug fixes and score generation at the moment... Sorry, didn't mean to get anyone's hopes up. It's getting closer to being done "real soon now". -- Bob --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: FREE SSL Guide from Thawte are you planning your Web Server Security? Click here to get a FREE Thawte SSL guide and find the answers to all your SSL security issues. http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0026en ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
Re: [SAtalk] whitelist from not working
First, don't ever edit 60_whitelist.cf if you can avoid it, add your own stuff to local.cf instead. 60_whitelist.cf, and ever other file in /usr/share/spamassassin/ will be obliterated without warning when you upgrade SA. Those files are not intended to be edited for general customization. You can do it, but realize that a SA upgrade will wipe those files out and replace them with new ones. As for your problem let's look at one entry. I'm also assuming each of these entries is one line, and that your MUA inserted line wraps for you. whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] oneclickhr.co.in Ok, do the affected emails which are addressed from (someuser)@oneclickhr.co.in also have the string "oneclickhr.co.in" in any of the Received: headers? If the mailservers for that domain are named something else you're going to have to insert the proper mailserver name, or part of a mailserver name that appears in the email's received: headers as the second parameter. Also, do a run of spamassassin -D --lint to make sure that you don't have any typoes in your configuration. If you have any typoes, by default SA has no place to complain, so it just silently skips large chunks of your config and goes on as best it can. At 10:06 AM 1/20/2003 -0800, Gary Lopez wrote: Hello, I don't know if I did this correctly or not, but I copied over the cf files from /usr/local/share/spamassassin to /etc/mail/spamassassin. I added a few of my own local entires to the 60_whitelist.cf file as follows: # Added for local mail whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] staff.beliefnet.com whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] msc-intl.com whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] thehungersite.com whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] yahoo-inc.com But stilll coming thru tagged as spam. Is there something in local.cf I am not setting properly ? --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: FREE SSL Guide from Thawte are you planning your Web Server Security? Click here to get a FREE Thawte SSL guide and find the answers to all your SSL security issues. http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0026en ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
[SAtalk] Spam-Report for non-spam
Hey, I put in the small change to PerMsgStatus.pm to add the X-Spam-Report for all email, not just spam, so that if I find a false-negative, it is easier to see what + and - points it *did* get (and not just the RULE names it matched)... It is pretty trivial, but I wondered if anyone else has yet found that helpful and should it be a suggestion for an enhancement - maybe "report_header_nonspam 1" or something?? jeff -- Jeff Culverhouse * [EMAIL PROTECTED] VP Operations, Rev.Net Technologies, Inc. V 540.772.3282 F 540.772.0573 --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: FREE SSL Guide from Thawte are you planning your Web Server Security? Click here to get a FREE Thawte SSL guide and find the answers to all your SSL security issues. http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0026en ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
[SAtalk] X-Mailer: PowerMail v2306297 legitamte or not?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Would this header ever show up in a legitamte mail? X-Mailer: PowerMail v2306297 - --- Randomly Generated Quote: IMPIETY, n. Your irreverence toward my deity. -- Ambrose Bierce Mike Loiterman PGP Key 0xD1B9D18E http://www.ascendency.net -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 8.0 Comment: This message has been digitally signed by Mike Loiterman iQA/AwUBPiyAo2jZbUnRudGOEQImjgCg122v+F2iU3Y/LsbqW3EttjNe9tsAn0Wj MLNwUyVduzb3gDlS4mbGJnPO =CxDD -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: FREE SSL Guide from Thawte are you planning your Web Server Security? Click here to get a FREE Thawte SSL guide and find the answers to all your SSL security issues. http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0026en ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
RE: [SAtalk] HTML only messages
Isnt it already in place to lower outlook scores? Why not just increase the score for HTML mails and increase the amount deducted for outlook? -Mensaje original- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]En nombre de Bob Proulx Enviado el: Monday, January 20, 2003 5:12 PM Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Asunto: Re: [SAtalk] HTML only messages Jeffrey Culverhouse wrote: > > I know the scores are tuned from a large directory of email, but I was under > the impression that HTML ONLY emails are very often spam and wondered what > the consensus of this list was?? Right now, it looks like it is just 0.4, > but I was thinking of raising that to 2.0 or so... I know, I can do what I > want, I just wanted a list opinion... Traditionally in the technical community the present of HTML was a strong indicator of spam. The original spamassassin rules reflected that and the scores for any html were quite high. I am in the technical community and html is not a suitable email format. But then SA because very popular and use spread to the business community. The business world, it seems, thinks that html email is great and should not be counted as spam. There were many sample emails submitted to the genetic algorithm engine which creates the SA scores. Therefore later versions of SA rules score html mail neutrally since in the business world it is not an indicator of spam. The primary difference and reason for divergence between these groups is that technical folks see the problems with MS-Outlook and generally refuse to use it. Business folks use MS-Outlook regardless of the its bugs. MS-Outlook is arguably one of the biggest sources of problems which water down spam filtering. > How many people running SA override the scores of particular rules and is > there some way of identifying rules that need higher scores (and most of you > are overriding) and really need to be adjusted in the distribution, if > any??? I override the present low scoring rules for html and increase them to a larger value. But I am rather contained and still the points added for html is lower than I would prefer. Here are two of my rules you might find useful. These are in addition to any SA added score for HTML. YMMV. header HTML_MESSAGE Content-Type =~ /text\/html/i describe HTML_MESSAGE HTML message score HTML_MESSAGE1.2 body HTML_IN_BODY /Content-Type:\s*text\/html/i describe HTML_IN_BODY HTML in body of mail score HTML_IN_BODY1.2 The new Bayes inference engine being added to the development version of SA has potential to learn this difference between communities. It will automatically determine that any html mail to me is spam but that to my business friend html mail is no indicator of spam one way or the other. I feel certain that it will do the job well within a given community. But being successful there may cause a bigger chasm between these groups since they will still be speaking differently. That is, I will "email them" in plain text mail and they will "outlook me" in html encoded mail. They will be able to read what I say but they will not be able to communicate to me. Hmm... Perhaps that is a good thing after all. Bob --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: FREE SSL Guide from Thawte are you planning your Web Server Security? Click here to get a FREE Thawte SSL guide and find the answers to all your SSL security issues. http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0026en ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
Re: [SAtalk] HTML only messages
Michael Moncur wrote on Mon, 20 Jan 2003 15:07:59 -0700: > a bunch of HTML newsletters > and a webmail client or two. > Expedia ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) does it as well for booking confirmations :-( Nevertheless I bumped it up to 2.0 and this scored the only false positive within weeks: Expedia. So, I use whitelist for them ... Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com IE-Center: http://ie5.de & http://msie.winware.org --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: FREE SSL Guide from Thawte are you planning your Web Server Security? Click here to get a FREE Thawte SSL guide and find the answers to all your SSL security issues. http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0026en ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
