On Понедельник, 5 Январь 2004 10:40, Robert Menschel wrote:
> Hello Alexander,
>
> Sunday, January 4, 2004, 7:43:59 PM, you wrote:
>
> AL> I have written some tests and don't know what is the score set for
> these AL> tests. Can some one make the suggestion how to score tests ?
>
> I have several a
At 09:43 AM 1/5/04 +0600, Alexander Litvinov wrote:
I have written some tests and don't know what is the score set for these
tests. Can some one make the suggestion how to score tests ?
My opinions are in my rule-writing guide, section 2.4
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mkettler/sa/SA-rules-howto
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Alexander,
Sunday, January 4, 2004, 7:43:59 PM, you wrote:
AL> I have written some tests and don't know what is the score set for these
AL> tests. Can some one make the suggestion how to score tests ?
I have several algorithms I use. Note that
Hello list.
I have written some tests and don't know what is the score set for these
tests. Can some one make the suggestion how to score tests ?
I can run mass check with my tests, but how to calculate the score using mass
check results. I suppose info N1 ham, N2 spam, N3 FP, N4 FN will be eno
Is there a way to retrieve the MX/A record info from spamassassin via a .cf
based test? I would like to be able to build a score reduction test that
will help legit messages get delivered. Here are my thoughts:
HELO & "A" record & rDNS domain match -1
HELO & "A" record & rDNS & MAILFROM domain
At 04:24 PM 11/25/03 +0800, Fritz Mesedilla wrote:
What happened to this mail?
Content analysis details: (0.3 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
-- --
0.3 NO_REAL_NAME From: does not i
What happened to this mail?
Content analysis details: (0.3 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
-- --
0.3 NO_REAL_NAME From: does not include a real name
How come it was blocked with a
http://spamassassin.taint.org/faq/index.cgi?req=show&file=faq04.017.htp
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Alan Munday
> Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 4:57 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Sc
Just had a mail in which had different *'s and score. I was expecting these
to be the same as I egrep the file and count the stars in post
processing.
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,HTML_30_40,
HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_RELAYING_FRAME,MICROSOFT_EX
At 23:01 23/11/2003 +, Alan Munday wrote:
Thanks Simon
I am using stars as I used the Advosys how-to as my starting point. I've
started playing with the scripts and wondered if SA left any variables set
e.g. hit value, that I could use rather than re-reading the file as I
thought this would be
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan
Munday
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 4:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SAtalk] Score
Just had a mail in which had different *'s and score. I was expecting these
to be the same as I egrep the file and count the stars in post
proce
Hello Alan,
Sunday, November 23, 2003, 1:57:43 PM, you wrote:
AM> Just had a mail in which had different *'s and score. ...
AM> X-Spam-Level:
AM> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.0 required=5.0 tests=...
AM> Is there a simple explanation for this?
Very simple -- hits is rounded to one decimal pl
as I separate
non-spam, from marked and delivered (5+) and marked and dumped into a
spamtrap (10+).
Regards
Alan
-Original Message-
From: Simon Byrnand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 November 2003 22:54
To: Alan Munday; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Score
>Is there
Thanks...
Didn't think to look at the FAQs (Which I normally do).
Shows you what happens when you act on impulse.
Alan
-Original Message-
From: Martin Radford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 November 2003 22:34
To: Alan Munday
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk]
At 21:57 23/11/2003 +, Alan Munday wrote:
Just had a mail in which had different *'s and score. I was expecting these
to be the same as I egrep the file and count the stars in post
processing.
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,HTML_30_40,
HT
At Sun Nov 23 21:57:43 2003, Alan Munday wrote:
>
>
> Just had a mail in which had different *'s and score. I was expecting these
> to be the same as I egrep the file and count the stars in post
> processing.
>
>
> X-Spam-Level:
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_2
03 4:58 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Score
>
>
>
> Just had a mail in which had different *'s and score. I was
> expecting these
> to be the same as I egrep the file and count the stars in post
> processing.
>
>
> X-Spam-Level:
&
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Score
>
>
> Just had a mail in which had different *'s and score. I was expecting
> these
> to be the same as I egrep the file and count the stars in post
> processing.
>
>
> X-Spam-Level:
> X-S
Just had a mail in which had different *'s and score. I was expecting these
to be the same as I egrep the file and count the stars in post
processing.
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,HTML_30_40,
HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_RELAYING_FRAME,MICROSOFT_EX
Hi there,
Wi some messages under score are marked as spam sometimes?
Thank´s any help.
Gustavo
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by OSDN developer relations
Here's your chance to show off your extensive product knowledge
We want
Dan Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How can I add points for messages with empty bodies?
> Assume the Lines: header is unreliable.
> Please CC me if you reply.
Hmmm... this should work.
rawbody __SOMETHING /\S/
meta BODY_EMPTY !__SOMETHING
score BODY_EMPTY0.5
Daniel
How can I add points for messages with empty bodies?
Assume the Lines: header is unreliable.
Please CC me if you reply.
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects.
See
> -Original Message-
> From: jpf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 5:20 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] score based on time of day rec'd?
>
>
> I was wondering if there are any tests that score based on
> what
Larry Gilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Read the archives under the subject "Mail arrival time may be a criteria".
> The following is a useful link:
>
> http://www.gryzor.com/tools/spamstats-pics.html
It is only marginally useful at best, IMO. SpamAssassin would be very
likely to assign such
Read the archives under the subject "Mail arrival time may be a criteria".
The following is a useful link:
http://www.gryzor.com/tools/spamstats-pics.html
--Larry
> -Original Message-
> From: jpf
> I was wondering if there are any tests that score based on
> what time of day
> the ma
I was wondering if there are any tests that score based on what time of day
the mail is being rec'd ... seems like I get most of my SPAM overnight and
HAM during the workday...it might be a useful rule to play with.
Does anyone have time-of-day stats? Maybe this isn't a true pattern.
Any help ske
Doug Wolfgram writes:
>I recently received the following message which gets a score of 0. It also
>says tests=none. Does that mean it spoofed spamassassin?
No. I would guess the filter could not find the rules files, that's
a symptom of that...
--j.
--
I recently received the following message which gets a score of 0. It also
says tests=none. Does that mean it spoofed spamassassin?
D
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail178.coolonlineactivity.net
(mail178.coolonlineactivity.net [65.61.140.57])
by localhost.localdomain
Hello all,
A gentleman I respect (Bruce Kushnick of teletruth, aka New Networks
Institute, at newnetworks.com) puts out a newsletter via Outlook Express. He's
getting caught by the above rule. Trivial to whitelist or mod the score, his
valid concern is that he just purchased a new computer and is
Dinter To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Sco
;t do this, your mailer does.
Does the level have a cutoff? Can I actually have a header with like 30+ '*'
in it? :)
-Original Message-
From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 4:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 03:32:16PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is there any way to modify the header that spam assassin puts out so that
> there is a key word like "low", "medium", "high" based on the score, so
> that rules can be set up in the .mailfilterrc accordingly?
There should be a F
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> I wanted to have a more granular control over the spam tagging of
> spamassassin. Basically what I want to do is something like this
>
> 1. If score < 4 do nothing
> 2. If 4 < score < 6 tag mail as low spam this should deliver to the
> default mailbox, but tagged a
Hi,
I wanted to have a more granular control over the spam tagging of
spamassassin. Basically what I want to do is something like this
1. If score < 4 do nothing
2. If 4 < score < 6 tag mail as low spam this should deliver to the
default mailbox, but tagged as spam
3. If 6 < score < 15 tag a
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 06:39:49PM -0400, David Corbin wrote:
> Is there a way to have this summary added (at the end) for non-spam
> messages, so that I can see why certain spam messages are no being
> detected, and by how many points they're not being detected?
spamassassin -t
:) It adds a
I've just installed SpamAssassin, and I'm trying to tune it correctly.
When SPAM is detected, it provides the nice little summary that explains
what rules added how many points, right at the front of the message.
Is there a way to have this summary added (at the end) for non-spam
messages, s
This has probably been considered before, but I thought I'd ask, since I'm
still relatively new to SA. Should there be a test for domains from which
lots of spam tends to originate? I know about the forged hotmail received
rules. I seem to get lots of Portuguese spam which originates in Brazil
Did you restart spamd?
C
Harry Putnam wrote:
HP> default info for COPY_DVDS:
HP> body COPY_DVDS /copy.{1,20}dvd/i
HP> describe COPY_DVDS Containts 'Copy DVDs'
HP> score COPY_DVDS 2.746
HP>
HP>
HP> I've attempted to over ride it with:
HP>
HP> ca
Harry Putnam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> default info for COPY_DVDS:
> body COPY_DVDS /copy.{1,20}dvd/i
> describe COPY_DVDS Containts 'Copy DVDs'
> score COPY_DVDS 2.746
>
>
> I've attempted to over ride it with:
>
> cat /etc/mail/spam/local.c
Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 11:55:07AM -0700, Harry Putnam wrote:
>> cat /etc/mail/spam/local.cf
>
> do you mean /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf?
yup
>> I know that /etc/mail/spam/local.cf is being read because of other
>> rules showing up in messages.
On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 11:55:07AM -0700, Harry Putnam wrote:
> cat /etc/mail/spam/local.cf
do you mean /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf?
> I know that /etc/mail/spam/local.cf is being read because of other
> rules showing up in messages. So what is wrong here?
Are you using spamc/d? Did you r
default info for COPY_DVDS:
body COPY_DVDS /copy.{1,20}dvd/i
describe COPY_DVDS Containts 'Copy DVDs'
score COPY_DVDS 2.746
I've attempted to over ride it with:
cat /etc/mail/spam/local.cf
[...]
score COPY_DVDS 1.8
[...]
But I still see
Nice feature! I'll add this to SA itself.
C
On Fri, 2002-02-22 at 10:06, Mark Roedel wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: CertaintyTech - Ed Henderson
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 10:05 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PRO
I'm not sure I've ever seen a non-spam message with a score higher than
10. There are a few 10's in the nonspam corpus, but no 11s or higher.
C
On Fri, 2002-02-22 at 08:05, CertaintyTech - Ed Henderson wrote:
> I am wanting to define SA scores based on filter sensitivity terms like
> High, Medi
> -Original Message-
> From: CertaintyTech - Ed Henderson
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 10:05 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Score levels
>
>
> I am wanting to define SA scores based on filter sensitivity
>
On Fri, 22 Feb 2002, CertaintyTech - Ed Henderson wrote:
> I am wanting to define SA scores based on filter sensitivity terms like
> High, Medium, and Low where High would be the most agressive blocking of
> Spam to Low which is the most lenient. This would be easier for my
> customers to unders
46 matches
Mail list logo
