Hi,
Karsten Bräckelmann-2 wrote:
>
>> > X-SpamScore: 0
>> > tests= SIZE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED
>
>> Some sw components to be ruled out:
>> - this isn't amavisd-new doing it, at least none of the official
>> versions;
>
> Right, that's definitely something else adding the headers, as has bee
Hi,
I just had a closer look at the header of an email which should have
been recognized by spamassassin as spam.
Waht I found was this:
X-SpamScore: 0
tests= SIZE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED
I have checked /usr/share/spamassassin/ for a rule which might contain a
size limit, but didn't finde
amavisd-new 2.5.2) and still see zero scores from plugins
> displayed:
Bug 5519. http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5519
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
for help, you'd better fix all
receipts. They might jump on these, otherwise...)
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
t going to read any further. It's quite frustrating to see when
replies and help offered on a mailing list is being ignored. Lots of
luck, with whatever you still are struggling with.
guenther
[1] That are char class parenthesis, no grouping with alternation. With
the pipe symbol in it
On Fri, 2007-07-06 at 20:15 +0200, Dirk Bonengel wrote:
> guenther schrieb:
> > Unfortunately, the example iXhash.cf of (current) version 1.0 is rather
> > scarce when it comes to the definitions. I'd wish for these to become as
> > informative again as they used
ew)
project home, and definitely back in place in the example cf file...
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
a mail
that got neither header.
Anyway, this is getting pretty much off-topic for this list. I'd check
your procmail recipes first, to see why the mail has not been been
processed by SpamAssassin.
> > Can some one please give me some hint why this happened. Why this
> > ema
d it, though.
Also, this run didn't identify a HTML part at all...
The only difference that accounts for the spamminess in the second run
is the URIBL_BLACK hit. Maybe an oops, maybe a misconfiguration, maybe
due to not running in real time, but long after.
> So I'm blaming it on Amav
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 17:45 +0200, Anders Norrbring wrote:
> Anyone else getting 404 errors from RDJ lately?
Yes, this topic came up just a few hours ago. Probably a dDOS attack.
Please disable all RDJ till further notice.
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char
ither, that alone
classifies a mail as spam. Carefully assigned scores based on the
"spammyness" and accumulating scores of multiple hit tests is a basic
concept of SA.
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
MHO SA
is not the best candidate for this kind of "gathering logs".
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
starters... Are you actually scanning outgoing mail for Spam?
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
tempt on being not subjective: Defaults are there for a
reason. Don't change a default, unless you fully understand the impact.
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
s move on and check the next receipt...
> Am I missing something obvious? thanks anyone!
The fact that procmail is not an MTA and does not queue mails (see the
description of the spamc -x option above).
...guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
only. AFAIK this is no reason to be concerned.
It just means, that the description is more than 50 chars long, and thus
a verbose report in the header may exceed an 80 chars limit.
FWIW, this is pretty common with some translations, like German.
...guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
ssin. No
need to look in any other users files...
...guenther
> On 5/26/05, Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Tim Macrina wrote:
> > > THis may be a dumb question but were can I find those lines? I looked
> > > in /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf and I ca
ther than Mail::Spamassassin::Autowhitelist you likely want 'man
spamassassin'. :)
See --remove-from-whitelist and --remove-addr-from-whitelist options.
You can provide the email address alone or feed it the respective mail.
HTH
...guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
ma
em, if you are
really sure not to get false positives.
...guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
s fine as it just means you are not stuck with the
default SPAM box but you can sort (move, delete, archive, whatever) any
mails based on the SA score on your local end.
...guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
20 matches
Mail list logo
