Spamassassin 3.0.1 + sendmail does not rewrite subject

Hi: We installed Spamassassin 3.0.1 fedora core 3 rpm with sendmail last week but it never rewrites the subject. We had use the new format already, but it's still not rewriting. But the X header is marked correctly though. Any suggestion how to fix that? rewrite_header Subject SPAM(_SCORE_)

Re: hostname to --fqdn?

Steve Prior wrote: > I've tried building/testing Spamassassin 3.02 as root and then as a > regular user - both times the SPF test failed, but I've noticed that > if I test as root the system ends up thinking its hostname is > --fqdn. Are there two versions of hostname around for Linux and > only

Re: Low Scores for High Bayesian Probabilities

- Original Message - From: "Thorsten Haude" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > One other thing: Will the score get mixed up if I only use some of the > network tests? No. > I just installed Razor and DCC, should I go for Pyzor > too? Or should I use only one? I use all three, but it's really up to

Re: Low Scores for High Bayesian Probabilities

Hi, * Robert Menschel wrote (2005-01-30 22:04): >You could reinstall and during the installation specify that you want >network tests off, but I think you'll be better off by fixing your >installation so the network tests work. One other thing: Will the score get mixed up if I only use some of th

awl and sql

I would like spamassassin to check and update awl in SQL database. I entered appropriate config options to my local.cf file and I get such an entry in my mysql log file: 050130 21:21:27  112559 Connect     [EMAIL PROTECTED] on user_auth                  112559 Query       SELECT count, totscore F

Re: Low Scores for High Bayesian Probabilities

Hi, please send me every mail only once. * Robert Menschel wrote (2005-01-30 22:04): >TH> I use Debian Sarge, which recently updated to SA 3.0.2. After this >TH> update, SA started assigning low scores to high Bayesian probabilties. >TH> I had a look at 50_scores.cf and it seems that SA uses the

Re: Low Scores for High Bayesian Probabilities

Hi, * Thomas Arend wrote (2005-01-30 21:39): >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >Am Sonntag, 30. Januar 2005 17:07 schrieb Thorsten Haude: >> The manpage tells me that the fourth column is used when "network >> tests are enabled". However, I couldn't find anything (neither in the >> FAQ nor in th

Re: Low Scores for High Bayesian Probabilities

Hello Thorsten, Sunday, January 30, 2005, 8:07:06 AM, you wrote: TH> I use Debian Sarge, which recently updated to SA 3.0.2. After this TH> update, SA started assigning low scores to high Bayesian probabilties. TH> I had a look at 50_scores.cf and it seems that SA uses the fourth TH> column where

Re: SpamAssassin not flagging much (SA version=3.0.2, Unix, spamd)

Hello Walter, Saturday, January 29, 2005, 8:48:55 PM, you wrote: WJ> Why aren't more tests being triggered? WJ> How do I get more rules to be triggered? (flip side of the coin) WJ> Unfortunately I can't use custom rules because my host WJ> (vonetwork.com) isn't willing to let users run custom ru

Re: Low Scores for High Bayesian Probabilities

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Sonntag, 30. Januar 2005 17:07 schrieb Thorsten Haude: [..] > > The manpage tells me that the fourth column is used when "network > tests are enabled". However, I couldn't find anything (neither in the > FAQ nor in the docs) about what these netwo

Re: logs and probably-spam almost-certainly-spam directories

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Mittwoch, 26. Januar 2005 19:20 schrieb Tony Lay: > Hey Gang, > > I am trying to establish system wide spam filtering, but only a few > users need it right now. So I have the flexibility to go either way. > I think that's where my problem stemsâI m

Re: SpamAssassin not flagging much (SA version=3.0.2, Unix, spamd)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Sonntag, 30. Januar 2005 05:48 schrieb Walter Jeffries: > I often get spam in that to me looks extremely spammy. > Yet SA doesn't seem to think much of it and pass it with > little to no comment. Below is a very typical example. > The only thing SA

Low Scores for High Bayesian Probabilities

Hi, I use SA for quite several months now and I'm very pleased with its performance. After a recent update though it stopped working for me. I use Debian Sarge, which recently updated to SA 3.0.2. After this update, SA started assigning low scores to high Bayesian probabilties. I had a look at 50

RE: SpamAssassin not flagging much (SA version=3.0.2, Unix, spamd)

At 09:40 AM 1.30.2005 -0500, Chris Harvey wrote: > >> Why aren't more tests being triggered? > >I was having similar problems recently where SA didn't seem to be picking up >much spam. Running spamd in debug mode showed me a number of things were >going wrong that must have happened over time with

RE: SpamAssassin not flagging much (SA version=3.0.2, Unix, spamd)

> Why aren't more tests being triggered? I was having similar problems recently where SA didn't seem to be picking up much spam. Running spamd in debug mode showed me a number of things were going wrong that must have happened over time with various other binary updates (i.e. DNS wasn't working)

Re: SpamAssassin not flagging much (SA version=3.0.2, Unix, spamd)

You really must meet the SpamAssassin Rules Emporium and its ninjas. These wonderful people have spent a great deal of time designing sets of rules for specific types of spam. Then they test them to get the optimal rule scores regarding their false alarm rates and miss rates on largar corpora of ha

SpamAssassin not flagging much (SA version=3.0.2, Unix, spamd)

I often get spam in that to me looks extremely spammy. Yet SA doesn't seem to think much of it and pass it with little to no comment. Below is a very typical example. The only thing SA noted was FORGED_RCVD_HELO which given both the subject line and the message content is rather surprising. Why are

Re: How do I restore database to default like a clean install

The user_prefs file may also want to be deleted to really restore to default configuration. {^_^} - Original Message - From: "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I suspect you basically are in a clean install state at the moment, with a > zapped Bayes db. YOu can do a dump magic to see

Re: SARE scores

Those rules are not supposed to be hit in error. They are generally phish rules that must override any white listing that is done. {^_^} - Original Message - From: "Rainer Sokoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hi, > > in 70_sare_spoof.cf some scores are set to 104. > So a hit in error would mark

Re: OT: MailFrontier

From: "Kelson Vibber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Friday 28 January 2005 6:05 pm, jdow wrote: > > I would ask the tweebs who black listed you precisely how they track it > > to your address. I'd love to hear their reasoning. > > Oh, I did! First they told me they couldn't provide anything more than

bayes database (berkeley DB) conversion question

Hopefully someone can shed some light on this. I have one server with some good sized bayes databases on it that I am trying to copy over to another server. The files are Berkeley DB Hash files, version 8. One of the servers I want to use this database on apparently has an older version of the Be