At 02:00 PM 1/21/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The spam I was trying to catch doesn't seem to be going through the rules
I added. What else do I have to do?
I'd start off with a run of spamassassin --lint to make sure you don't have
a typo.
After that, if it still doesn't work check the debug ou
I'm running SpamAssassin using spamd, and invoking on my own system
through an entry in procmailrc. SpamAssassin runs fine and does indeed
properly filter out a lot of spam.
Yesterday, I added a number of rules to $HOME/.spamassassin/user_prefs.
I ran /home/alayne/sausr/bin/spamassassin -D < /tmp
-Original Message-
From: "Gerry Doris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 12:14:26 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [SAtalk] Why SPAM looks the way it does O/T
> All this time I thought that there were evil minds at work finding ways
> to
> ge
All this time I thought that there were evil minds at work finding ways to
generate bayes busting spam...
warning...this is politically uncorrect!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/28/34840.html
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perfor
At 01:51 PM 12/22/2003, mairhtin wrote:
Can anyone tell me why this did not get tagged? It clearly states that
the date is thursday jan 01. Does the date header
not get checked?
Mairhtin
I believe that SA does not look for a date in the future relative to the
current local system time, it lo
Can anyone tell me why this did not get tagged? It clearly states that the date is
thursday jan 01. Does the date header
not get checked?
Mairhtin
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from adsl-64-108-195-217.dsl.chcgil.ameritech.net
(adsl-64-108-195-217.dsl.chcgil.ameritech.n
Hi,
I've attached 3 messages that are getting quite low scores by SA.
I'm running SA 2.60, with bayes. I frequently get messages quite similar
to these, a number of them every single day. And every day I run them
through sa-learn.
However they continue to get low scores.
Are spammers learning n
So I'm executing
my $status = $spamtest->learn ($mail);
and the status in the debugger shows all the right things suggesting
it's been learnt
however the nham count in sa-learn --dump isn't changed.
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: I
Out of curiosity, is there a reason why SpamAssassin omits a configuration
option for razor_add_header when dcc_add_header and pyzor_add_header exist?
Thanks in advance.
--
Adam J. Foxson
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tuto
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Timprice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 21:50:06 -0100
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --> 78% D.1.SC0.UNT!! xvjtk crbqap
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/ht
At 12:39 PM 12/5/2003, Chris Barnes wrote:
My autolearn threshhold is the default (what is that 15?). Other
accounts do autolearn, but I'm not sure why this one didn't. Ideas?
Here is the report:
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=54.7
1) the autolearning score of this email isn't 54.7, and it's not 54.7 -
My autolearn threshhold is the default (what is that 15?). Other
accounts do autolearn, but I'm not sure why this one didn't. Ideas?
Here is the report:
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=54.7 required=5.0 tests=BAD_CREDIT,BAYES_99,
BigEvilList_48,CLICK_BELOW_CAPS,DATE_IN_FUTURE_03_06,
DATE_SPAMWARE_Y2
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 06:32:12PM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> Googling around led me to a couple of sites that said the man page
> explains the four scores, but I can't find anything. Before I start
> changing scores, I'd like to understand exactly what each one is for.
It's in the docs under th
Googling around led me to a couple of sites that said the man page
explains the four scores, but I can't find anything. Before I start
changing scores, I'd like to understand exactly what each one is for.
Also, is the correct way to change them to copy the lines I want to
change to /etc/mail/spam
> -Original Message-
> From: Dan Kohn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 2:35 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Why Bayes is so essential
>
>
> Here is a spam that should convince people to turn on Bayes. This
&g
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 11:14:40AM -0600, Stewart, John wrote:
>
> > Some time ago, there was an announcement of patches to SA to allow for
> > SQL-stored Bayes databases.
> >
> > I haven't seen word of this being integrated in to the main
> > tree since then,
> > but it's possible I've missed i
> Some time ago, there was an announcement of patches to SA to allow for
> SQL-stored Bayes databases.
>
> I haven't seen word of this being integrated in to the main
> tree since then,
> but it's possible I've missed it.
Hmm... I don't recall seeing this at all; does anyone have any info on t
Thus spake Dan Kohn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [20/11/03 14:35]:
> Here is a spam that should convince people to turn on Bayes. This
> Nigerian spam was almost certainly continually resent against
> SpamAssassin 2.60. Each time, the words were altered slightly until
> none of the rules fired. However,
Here is a spam that should convince people to turn on Bayes. This
Nigerian spam was almost certainly continually resent against
SpamAssassin 2.60. Each time, the words were altered slightly until
none of the rules fired. However, SpamAssassin with untrained Bayes
turned on can still catch the sp
Justin Mason wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> "Samuel Murez" writes:
>> Matt Kettler wrote:
>>> At 01:12 AM 11/18/03 +0100, Samuel Murez wrote:
Hello--
Could somebody please take just a minute to tell me how to do this
?
It seems very
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
"Samuel Murez" writes:
>Matt Kettler wrote:
>> At 01:12 AM 11/18/03 +0100, Samuel Murez wrote:
>>> Hello--
>>>
>>> Could somebody please take just a minute to tell me how to do this ?
>>>
>>> It seems very simple but I've tried many solutions and noth
On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 13:55, Samuel Murez wrote:
...
>
> Thanks for anwering ! I was really puzzled by this. So there's no way to get
> french messages for one user and english for all other users ?
>
> --sam
...
Are you calling SA from .procmailrc? Try setting LANG=fr there.
--
Jack Coates, Ly
Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 01:12 AM 11/18/03 +0100, Samuel Murez wrote:
>> Hello--
>>
>> Could somebody please take just a minute to tell me how to do this ?
>>
>> It seems very simple but I've tried many solutions and nothing's
>> working !
>>
>> I would like one of my users to receive spamassassin
At 01:12 AM 11/18/03 +0100, Samuel Murez wrote:
Hello--
Could somebody please take just a minute to tell me how to do this ?
It seems very simple but I've tried many solutions and nothing's working !
I would like one of my users to receive spamassassin template messages in
french, while the rest
Hello--
Could somebody please take just a minute to tell me how to do this ?
It seems very simple but I've tried many solutions and nothing's working !
I would like one of my users to receive spamassassin template messages in
french, while the rest continue receiving them in english.
I know the
I'm running spamassassin in my home directory (~/bin) and have compiled
razor, dccproc, and pyzor, which all work fine when tested with
SpamAssassin -D. However, while dccproc and pyzor are regularly
triggered on spam run through procmail, razor never is. Specifically,
when I run 'spamassassin -D
<http://www.dankohn.com/>
-Original Message-
From: Dan Kohn
Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 08:07
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SAtalk] Why does razor2 work with spamassassin -D but not
through procmail?
I'm running spamassassin in my home directory (~/bin) and have compiled
ra
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, Dan Kohn wrote:
> debug: executable for dccproc was found at /home/dankohn/bin/dccproc
>
> Could someone please tell me why razor triggers in the former but not
> the latter?
You're sure the PATH contains $HOME/bin when procmail is invoked by
sendmail?
--
> -Original Message-
> From: O-Zone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Wednesday 08 October 2003 13:40, Tom Meunier wrote:
> > (I must be annoying SOMEBODY) Hi Oz, Which
> > machine(s) have spamassassin? I know domini does, but does
> siena also
> > have spamassassin? That would cause
On Wednesday 08 October 2003 13:40, Tom Meunier wrote:
> (I must be annoying SOMEBODY)
> Hi Oz,
> Which machine(s) have spamassassin? I know domini does, but does siena
> also have spamassassin? That would cause this behavior.
Yes, also Siena have Spamassassin ! It's wrong ? Why ? :O
Thanks a
(I must be annoying SOMEBODY)
Hi Oz,
Which machine(s) have spamassassin? I know domini does, but does siena
also have spamassassin? That would cause this behavior.
-tom
- headers -
On Wednesday 08 October 2003 13:25, you wrote:
> It's difficult to see because you're not incl
including full headers.
-tom
> -Original Message-
> From: O-Zone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 9:39 AM
> To: David B Funk
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Why SpamAssassin STOP FILTERING SPAM !!! HELP
> !!!
>
> debug: running m
On Wednesday 08 October 2003 03:33, David B Funk wrote:
> spamassassin -D --lint
>
> If that looks OK, try feeding the test-spam message to spamassassin
> (again as your 'spamfilter' user and with -D ).
See with your eyes what i get:
debug: Score set 0 chosen.
debug: running in taint mode? yes
On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, O-Zone wrote:
> Hi all,
> here's my problem, AGAIN ! I've checked perms into /usr/share/spamassassin and
> are all owned by spamfilter user. This is my startup command:
>
> /usr/bin/spamd -a -C /etc/mail/spamassassin/ -d -u spamfilter -m 10
It may still be a permissions proble
On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, O-Zone wrote:
> Hi all,
> here's my problem, AGAIN ! I've checked perms into /usr/share/spamassassin and
> are all owned by spamfilter user. This is my startup command:
>
> /usr/bin/spamd -a -C /etc/mail/spamassassin/ -d -u spamfilter -m 10
>
> and this is an header of a SPAM m
At 04:06 PM 10/7/03 +, O-Zone wrote:
Hi all,
here's my problem, AGAIN !
First, run spamassassin --lint
If there are any complaints about your configuration files, fix them. Minor
typos can cause bad side effects.
If that doesn't help.. try running a message through SA with the debug
output
Hi all,
here's my problem, AGAIN ! I've checked perms into /usr/share/spamassassin and
are all owned by spamfilter user. This is my startup command:
/usr/bin/spamd -a -C /etc/mail/spamassassin/ -d -u spamfilter -m 10
and this is an header of a SPAM mail NOT filtered:
===
AM
To: Martin, Jeffrey
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] why is this learned as ham?
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:35:44AM -0400, Martin, Jeffrey wrote:
> But the example scored 0.4, so it still shouldn't be autolearned,
> right?
run with -D and read the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf d
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:21:10AM -0400, Martin, Jeffrey wrote:
> I just upgraded a test system to 2.6, and it is doing something strange.
> The header indicates that messages are being autolearned that shouldn't
> be. The auto_learn settings in /usr/share/spamassassin are:
>
> 10_misc.cf:auto_le
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:35:44AM -0400, Martin, Jeffrey wrote:
> But the example scored 0.4, so it still shouldn't be autolearned, right?
run with -D and read the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf doc, specifically the
section about bayes_auto_learn.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"I develop for Linux
Oops, I was on the wrong system. The real settings on this one are;
10_misc.cf:# learning system automatically, to train the Bayesian
scanner.
10_misc.cf:bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam 0.1
10_misc.cf:bayes_auto_learn_threshold_spam 12.0
10_misc.cf:# Set this to 0 to turn off aut
I just upgraded a test system to 2.6, and it is doing something strange.
The header indicates that messages are being autolearned that shouldn't
be. The auto_learn settings in /usr/share/spamassassin are:
10_misc.cf:auto_learn_threshold_nonspam -2
10_misc.cf:auto_learn_threshold_spam15
This i
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 08:40:03AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Why is this test scored so low in the first place ?
http://spamassassin.taint.org/faq/index.cgi?req=show&file=faq01.005.htp
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"The greatest of all faults is to be conscious of none." - Thomas Carlyl
As a newbie to spamassassin I was surprised to see emails
offering to enlarge my private parts, passing the filter
with low scores.
I noticed that P***_Enlarge only scores 2.8
I have altered my user_pref file to now score this test
at 20
Why is this test scored so low in the first place ?
-
At 03:18 PM 9/26/03 -0700, Ron Snyder wrote:
I'm running SA 2.60-rc1, and have noticed that spamassassin is not catching
microsoft executable attachments when they arrive as an enclosed bounce
message. Shouldn't SA be detecting the microsoft_executable stuff since the
test is done on rawbody?
The t
I'm running SA 2.60-rc1, and have noticed that spamassassin is not catching
microsoft executable attachments when they arrive as an enclosed bounce
message. Shouldn't SA be detecting the microsoft_executable stuff since the
test is done on rawbody?
Here's the SA headers-
>From the sendmail qf* fil
To: John Schneider; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FW: Re[2]: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails
?
Hello John,
JS> Abigail,
JS> If a user puts this recipe into their .procmail file,
JS> where would the log entries be collected. (Sorry, but
JS> I'm a procma
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, BG Mahesh wrote:
> Not sure if the rules we have added in local.cf are wrong. We are using SA+procmail
>
> header LATEST_NET_SPAM Subject =~/^Latest Net Critical Upgrade/i
> describe LATEST_NET_SPAM Bounce - "Spam from Microsoft"
> scoreLATEST_NET_SPAM 10.0
>
> Even if t
Original Message-
JS> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JS> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Abigail
JS> Marshall
JS> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 5:10 PM
JS> To: Stephen Reese; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JS> Subject: Re[2]: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
JS&g
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 05:27:57PM -0400, Stephen Reese elucidated:
> how do I turn up the MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE?
>
check out your .spamassassin/user_prefs file, it has directions in
there. But it is basically like:
score MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE 6.0
or some such.
Dale
-
how do I turn up the MICROSOFT_EXECUTABLE?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Scott Comboni
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 9:07 AM
To: Dale Harris
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails
> -Original Message-
> From: BG Mahesh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 1:37 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
>
>
> > Well they were being passed straight to the
> Well they were being passed straight to the user since the courier
> mailfilter file was picking them out due to the size being > than 24kb
> so there was no chance for SA to parse them.
>
hi
Not sure if the rules we have added in local.cf are wrong. We are using SA+procmail
header LATEST_N
This has seemed to work for me as well. Like you pointed out the ones
that have no .exe still manage to get in.
Scott
On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 20:46, Dale Harris wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:37:27AM +1200, Simon Byrnand elucidated:
> >
> > Although I havn't tried it, I would say that teac
ent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
Simon Byrnand wrote:
>>I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I
>>am also getting messages that seem to orginate from o
At Tue Sep 23 21:45:13 2003, Renato G. Troitino wrote:
>
> Just curious... when a message get enought points to be a spam, it should be
> set autolearn=yes right? So why all the messages gets autolearn=no even
> getting 15 hits???
Learning spam as ham (or ham as spam) is really bad. If you sta
Reese
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails
?
This could also be 2.55 issue where messages with multiple MIME parts
was not completly scanned? For example, the thread about pic.gif where
that spammer used some trick with multiple mime parts and that caused
the messa
This could also be 2.55 issue where messages with multiple MIME parts was
not completly scanned?
For example, the thread about pic.gif where that spammer used some trick
with multiple mime parts
and that caused the message to be invisible. The good news is this is fixed
in 2.60 and that's a final
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 05:45:13PM -0300, Renato G. Troitino wrote:
> Just curious... when a message get enought points to be a spam, it should be
> set autolearn=yes right? So why all the messages gets autolearn=no even
> getting 15 hits???
I wish people would rtfm:
Also note that a
Hello Stephen,
Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 3:09:51 PM, you wrote:
SR> h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
SR> though see's everything else?
Because the 150K attachment that comes with Swen is either
too big to be sent to SA (depending on how you have
configured
Just curious... when a message get enought points to be a spam, it should be
set autolearn=yes right? So why all the messages gets autolearn=no even
getting 15 hits???
Sds;
Troitino
> Interesting point. Perhaps instead of "autolearn=", it should read:
>
> autolearnt=ham/spam/no
> or
>
Simon Byrnand wrote:
I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
don't.
The reason SpamAssassin doesn't catch them is twofold:
Maybe I'm misinterpreting the original question, but was it no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Simon,
Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 4:37:27 PM, you wrote:
SB> Although I havn't tried it, I would say that teaching the message to
BAYES
SB> using sa-learn in 2.60 should be very effective, as BAYES_99 in 2.60
has a
SB> high enough score to ta
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 02:40:49AM +0100, Daniel Bird wrote:
> Maybe I'm misinterpreting the original question, but was it not the fact
> that it appeared SA was not even scanning the mail?
could be, I was just reading the subject which implies "why does SA not
mark these mails as spam?"
--
Ran
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:37:27AM +1200, Simon Byrnand elucidated:
>
> Although I havn't tried it, I would say that teaching the message to BAYES
> using sa-learn in 2.60 should be very effective, as BAYES_99 in 2.60 has a
> high enough score to tag as spam without any other tests...
>
That an
half Of Ryan
Moore
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 7:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
Is there a size limit that SA implements to avoid scanning huge messages
whose content is primarily binary? I know amavisd has a limit such as
th
Stephen Reese wrote:
> h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
> though see's everything else?
In a nutshell, because virus messages don't look much like spam.
Virus messages are usually sent via a legitimate ISP's mail server.
They have (usually) valid return addresse
> I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
> also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
> don't.
The reason SpamAssassin doesn't catch them is twofold:
1) It's a virus, not spam.
2) It's only just come out, after the ruleset for 2.60 wa
ED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
I am getting nailed with these as well, 72 for the day so far. Other
admins I talked here have had over 100 so far on the day.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Stephen Reese
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 06:09:51PM -0400, Stephen Reese wrote:
> h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
> though see's everything else?
Worms are not spam by definition. (the "people" sending the worms when
you get it don't intend to send it to you, therefore it's not
h, i still don't understand why SA is not even looking at them
though see's everything else?
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Kaliel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 5:59 PM
To: Stephen Reese; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] why is sa no
: [SAtalk] why is sa not catching the microsoft emails ?
I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
don't.
I am running sa 2.6, redhat 7.3, courier 0.43.0
The following is a header
I've been getting tons of this mail usually with virus's attached. I am
also getting messages that seem to orginate from our own server but they
don't.
I am running sa 2.6, redhat 7.3, courier 0.43.0
The following is a header from one of the messages:
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Return-Path
At Tue Sep 23 06:52:40 2003, Patrick Morris wrote:
> Robert Nicholson wrote:
>
> > X-Spam-Status:
> > Yes, hits=10.7 required=0.6 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_03_06,
> > DATE_SPAMWARE_Y2K,FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTML,HTML_60_70,
> > HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_FONTCOLOR_GREEN,HTML_FONTCOLOR_RED,
> >
Robert Nicholson wrote:
> RE:
>
> X-Spam-Status:
> Yes, hits=10.7 required=0.6 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_03_06,
> DATE_SPAMWARE_Y2K,FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTML,HTML_60_70,
> HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_FONTCOLOR_GREEN,HTML_FONTCOLOR_RED,
> HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_ONLY,MIME_HTML_ONLY_MULTI,MISSING_
It seems i didn't appreciate that autolearn in that line relates to how
that particular message was autolearnt.
So things are working as I expect them to.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgee
RE:
X-Spam-Status:
Yes, hits=10.7 required=0.6 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_03_06,
DATE_SPAMWARE_Y2K,FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTML,HTML_60_70,
HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_FONTCOLOR_GREEN,HTML_FONTCOLOR_RED,
HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_ONLY,MIME_HTML_ONLY_MULTI,MISSING_MIMEOLE,
NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP autolea
> You also didn't say what version of SA, or anything about your setup (bayes
> enabled? awl enabled? is razor installed?, etc). Including some
> configuration information, at least a version, is helpful when asking this
> kind of question.
quite honest i am running a default installation of
At 06:34 PM 9/21/03 -0400, landy wrote:
any idea why this pass thru SA
Well, first, that message is not spam, it's a virus. It's the result of a
newer mail worm/virus called the swen worm.
SpamAssassin sometimes tags viruses, but that's not it's job in life. It's
job is to identify spam and take
any idea why this pass thru SA
From:
MS Security
Services
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Commercial Partner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject:
New Microsoft
Critical Update
Date:
Sun, 21 Sep 2003
18:13:41 -0400
Microsoft
All Products | Support |
Se
- Original Message -
From: "SpamAssassin Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ian D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] why are scores so high?
> Ian D. wrote:
>
> >We
Ian D. wrote:
We have had some legitimate mail messages that scored higher than
anticipated, and it appears that the following tests are the biggest
contributors:
score BASE64_ENC_TEXT 2.354 1.643 1.544 1.768
score MIME_HTML_NO_CHARSET 0.638 0.759 0.365 0.0
Is base64-encoded text really such a t
We have had some legitimate mail messages that scored higher than
anticipated, and it appears that the following tests are the biggest
contributors:
score BASE64_ENC_TEXT 2.354 1.643 1.544 1.768
score MIME_HTML_NO_CHARSET 0.638 0.759 0.365 0.0
Is base64-encoded text really such a telling sign of
At 06:31 AM 9/4/2003 -0400, landy wrote:
i have been getting many of these
and even after doing sa-learn the score is super low,
these emails are really pissing me of
Are you *SURE* those aren't a GENUINE email related to your real ebay account?
The fact that the message matches GENUINE_EBAY_RCVD
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 06:31:09AM -0400, landy wrote:
> i have been getting many of these
> and even after doing sa-learn the score is super low,
> these emails are really pissing me of
>
>
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; cha
http://useast.spamassassin.org/tests.html
You've got negative scores all over that thing. Add them up.
> -Original Message-
> From: landy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 5:31 AM
> To: SA
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk]
i have been getting many of these
and even after doing sa-learn the score is super low,
these emails are really pissing me of
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Subject: Change password.
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:35:21
Hmm, turns out that I'm getting admin messages about these, but they're
not actually stopped. Looks like $sa_tag2_level_deflt and
$sa_kill_level_deflt in amavisd.conf were the root cause.
I've set them to match the sa setting in local.cf and will see how that
runs...
- steve
At 09:47 AM 9/4/03 +1200, Steve Brorens wrote:
On my experimantal 'gateway' configuration (Postfix/Amavisd-new/SA) I
see a few instances where msgs get classified as spam tho the report
shows the hits DO NOT exceed the required:
---snip form the report---
Content ana
--On Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:47 AM +1200 Steve Brorens
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On my experimantal 'gateway' configuration (Postfix/Amavisd-new/SA) I
> see a few instances where msgs get classified as spam tho the report
> shows the hits DO NOT exceed the required:
>
> ---
On my experimantal 'gateway' configuration (Postfix/Amavisd-new/SA) I
see a few instances where msgs get classified as spam tho the report
shows the hits DO NOT exceed the required:
---snip form the report---
Content analysis details: (3.40 points, 3.75 required)
> On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 23:48:44 -0400 Daniel Carrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> How do I find out which one my system has? This is a UNIX network.
>
> You'd have to look at the SA docs or in the score sets; I'm not sure
> which ones SA uses out-of-the-box. I prefer the open proxy lists, dialu
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 23:48:44 -0400 Daniel Carrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Nope. 'net' means with DNSBL checks. 'local' means no DNSBL lookups.
>
> Huh? What is a DNSBL?
DNS-based blacklist - see http://openrbl.org and
http://www.declude.com/junkmail/support/ip4r.htm for more info.
> How
> Nope. 'net' means with DNSBL checks. 'local' means no DNSBL lookups.
Huh? What is a DNSBL?
How do I find out which one my system has? This is a UNIX network.
--
Daniel Carrera | PGP: 6643 8C8B 3522 66CB D16C D779 2FDD 7DAC 9AF7 7A88
Math PhD. UMD | http://www.math.umd.edu/~dcarrera/pgp.htm
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 21:56:40 -0400 Daniel Carrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I think I sort of understand why rules have 4 numbers. But I was hoping
> that someone could confirm this. From the SA website, I learn that there
> are 4 scores I can attribute to each rule:
>local,
Hello,
I think I sort of understand why rules have 4 numbers. But I was hoping
that someone could confirm this. From the SA website, I learn that there
are 4 scores I can attribute to each rule:
local, net, with bayes, with bayes+net
I figure that the later two correspond to the first two
Title: Message
I have a list of
specific trusted addresses in my whitelist, but it still won't autolearn from
them. Why not? Their scores are quite negative, way below -2, but it still won't
autolearn from them. It looks like it's ignoring the whitelist when checking
whether or not it should
At 20:30 13/07/03 -0700, Chris Petersen wrote:
> Whatever I do, sa-learn will not accept it as spam. :(
It takes about 500-1000 learned spams before SA starts marking things
with the bayes filter. I've put at least that many in, and still only
about half of my spams have bayes markings in them (a
> Whatever I do, sa-learn will not accept it as spam. :(
It takes about 500-1000 learned spams before SA starts marking things
with the bayes filter. I've put at least that many in, and still only
about half of my spams have bayes markings in them (and about 10% of my
daily spam still gets throug
- Original Message -
From: "Theo Van Dinter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 1:57 AM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Why wil "sa-learn" not learn?
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 10:
1 - 100 of 248 matches
Mail list logo
