Here's a syntax file I created for Vim to highlight SpamAssassin
config files (see attached). To enable it, add this to your
~/.vim/filetype.vim (which you may have to create):
augroup filetypedetect
au BufRead,BufNewFile *.cf setfiletype spamassassin
augroup END
(If you already have augro
Mark a écrit :
> Just noticed this on spam:
>
>
>
> 2.1 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS Subject is all capitals
>
>
>
> I know I can change scores at will, of course,
>
> but a default of 2.1, that seems a mite excessive, no?
>
remember: default score are computed automatically.
and while some l
Neil Schwartzman a écrit :
>
>
> On 06/04/09 10:53 AM, "Matus UHLAR - fantomas" wrote:
>
>> On 04.04.09 16:30, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
>>> On 04/04/09 4:22 PM, "RobertH" wrote:
>>>
0.2 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP
address
Matus UHLAR - fantomas a écrit :
> On 05.04.09 14:18, Jeremy Morton wrote:
>> Hmm, not sure why my Spamassassin isn't detecting it as spam then. How
>> do I set Spamassassin to give me a full spam analysis header even when
>> the message isn't detected as spam? As you can see it just gives me a
On 6-Apr-2009, at 08:57, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
I've never had problem with score of this rule. Subject is a thing the
sender can easily change when you told him not to do this.
That's not even the issue. It's simply that all caps subjects are
quite rare in ham and quite common in spa
Mark wrote:
> Eh, it's no biggie, really, I was just surprised it scores as high as,
> say, being listed on DCC. But then again, who actually *does* write in all
> caps, except a spammer? :)
Quite a few of my employer’s correspondents: and not just in the
subject!
I know a number of my users who
On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Savoy, Jim wrote:
I may be able to answer my own question, as something like this was
asked a few weeks ago and John Hardin said that AWL is a misleading
name, as it is just giving an "average" score, not necessarily
whitelisting something. Thanks John.
...glad to help! :
-Original Message-
From: Matus UHLAR - fantomas [mailto:uh...@fantomas.sk]
Sent: maandag 6 april 2009 16:59
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Near capitable punishment for all capitals?
On 05.04.09 22:48, Mark wrote:
> > Just noticed this on spam:
> >
> > 2.1 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS
>127.0.0.1 is not remote host :/
>did you send it for testing ?
Nope. This was a real, live message from the outside world.
>make sure that exim do send remote ip to sa, else it will work
badly, also that exim does not accept and bounce, i have seen it, if
its spam then reject
I'm pretty sure o
Hi all,
I just noticed that we have had auto_whitelisting turned off since
2005 (!). I just turned it
back on (first deleting the auto_whitelist file in
/home/exim/.spamassassin (we run a site-wide
installation) and ensuring that file was re-created after restarting
spamd). It seems to
On Mon, April 6, 2009 19:44, Savoy, Jim wrote:
> Hi all,
> I just noticed that we have had auto_whitelisting turned off
> since 2005 (!). I just turned it
>
> back on (first deleting the auto_whitelist file in
> /home/exim/.spamassassin (we run a site-wide
> installation) and ensuring that file wa
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 11:44 -0600, Savoy, Jim wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
>I just noticed that we have had auto_whitelisting turned off since
> 2005 (!). I just turned it
>
> back on (first deleting the auto_whitelist file
> in /home/exim/.spamassassin (we run a site-wide
>
> installati
I may be able to answer my own question, as something like this was
asked a few
weeks ago and John Hardin said that AWL is a misleading name, as it is
just giving an
"average" score, not necessarily whitelisting something. Thanks John.
On 06/04/09 10:53 AM, "Matus UHLAR - fantomas" wrote:
> On 04.04.09 16:30, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
>> On 04/04/09 4:22 PM, "RobertH" wrote:
>>
>>> 0.2 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP
>>> address
>>> [209.92.22.130 listed in dnsb
On 05.04.09 22:48, Mark wrote:
> Just noticed this on spam:
>
> 2.1 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS Subject is all capitals
If it was a spam, why do you care? If that would be FP, we may talk about
it.
> I know I can change scores at will, of course,
> but a default of 2.1, that seems a mite excessive, n
On 04.04.09 16:30, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
> On 04/04/09 4:22 PM, "RobertH" wrote:
>
> > 0.2 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP
> > address
> > [209.92.22.130 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
>
> That would be incorrect. The IP is static, no
On 05.04.09 14:18, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Hmm, not sure why my Spamassassin isn't detecting it as spam then. How
> do I set Spamassassin to give me a full spam analysis header even when
> the message isn't detected as spam? As you can see it just gives me a
> 'X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7'.
D
John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Marc Perkel wrote:
as i noted in the last post, it was about the difference between
JMF_Whitelist and RCVD in Barracuda
barracusa says spam, jmf whitelist is obvious.
I agree. In fact I removed that host from my white list. I am very
interested in
On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Marc Perkel wrote:
as i noted in the last post, it was about the difference between
JMF_Whitelist and RCVD in Barracuda
barracusa says spam, jmf whitelist is obvious.
I agree. In fact I removed that host from my white list. I am very
interested in the idea of someone c
RobertH wrote:
0.2 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from
dynamic IP
address
[209.92.22.130 listed in
dnsbl.sorbs.net]
That would be incorrect. The IP is static, not dynamic.
whois://209.92.22@whois.arin.net
PaeTec
Neil Schwartzman wrote:
On 04/04/09 11:31 AM, "RobertH" wrote:
greetings...
i am working at re-learning and applying SA fine tuning.
in doing so, i have some across some real life SA scoring anomalies.
it is interesting because one public reputaion service rule offering says to
score
it's now gone ;)
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 02:33, Daryl C. W. O'Shea
wrote:
> On 02/04/2009 10:01 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>> we should probably remove that warning. it's been stable (at least in the
>> sense of the code not changing) for a long time now!
>
> +1 -- I've been using M::SA::Client on m
22 matches
Mail list logo
