That code is in CVS already -- might have made it into 2.1 or 2.11 -- don't
recall.
from perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf:
subject_tag STRING ...(default: *SPAM*)
Text added to the "Subject:" line of mails that are
considered spam, if "rewrite_subjec
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Why to deliver SPAM even if it's identified. (was
Re: Spamd and Milter - Expected Results?)
Is there a way we can put the score in the subject?
ie: * SPAM 17.3/7 *
or something to that effect? Fu
On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 08:14:41PM -0800, Kenneth Chen wrote:
> Is there a way we can put the score in the subject?
>
> ie: * SPAM 17.3/7 *
>
> or something to that effect? Further, someone on this same thread
> mentioned that they bounce anything with scores above 17 at the SMTP
> leve
Is there a way we can put the score in the subject?
ie: * SPAM 17.3/7 *
or something to that effect? Further, someone on this same thread
mentioned that they bounce anything with scores above 17 at the SMTP
level. How do you go about configuring something like that?
Kenneth
Yes, you have a point. However, running logcheck I am notified
every hour of each message that gets bounced, and if the sender
or subject line bears scrutiny, I can check it and whitelist_to
or whitelist_from in local.cf as appropriate. The bounces are
copied and archived for seven days.
This
Hi daniel,
> > I don't see much point in tagging spam and then delivering
> > it anyway. The spammers still got their message through.
> > So what if it's in a special little folder all its own?
>
> The problem with this approach is that SpamAssassin is a heuristic
> system. I have had a number
> > I don't see much point in tagging spam and then delivering
> > it anyway. The spammers still got their message through.
> > So what if it's in a special little folder all its own?
>
> The problem with this approach is that SpamAssassin is a heuristic
> system. I have had a number of false posi
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Michael Grau wrote:
[...]
> I don't see much point in tagging spam and then delivering
> it anyway. The spammers still got their message through.
> So what if it's in a special little folder all its own?
The problem with this approach is that SpamAssassin is a heuristic
sys
