Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>
> Jberliner wrote on Wed, 14 Jan 2009 11:34:33 -0800 (PST):
>
>> A couple of things about the non-tagged messages: they usually feature a
>> spoofed sender address identical to the recipient, but not always: so,
>> e.g.
>> From: To: m...
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>
> Jberliner wrote on Tue, 13 Jan 2009 17:16:20 -0800 (PST):
>
>> spamassassin -D --lint
>
> did you check if the same happens when you run those messages thru
> "spamassassin -D" and thru spamc?
>
>
Yes, I had already sent t
RobertH-2 wrote:
>
>
> basically it all depends on the qmail-scanner config and it can be semi
> complex and may not be correct in terms of if you reject over certain
> score
> or if you have other scanning functions happening before calling SA, like
> clamav etc etc
>
> also, the message coul
A good percentage of our emails are not getting evaluated by SA's rules.
qmail + qmail-scanner + Spamassassin 3.25 + ClamAV on FreeBSD. Supervised by
daemontools.
I've started spamd with debugging on, and tinkered with the various child
process values:
#exec spamd -D -x -u qscand -H /tmp -s /de
I'm running a patched qmailrocks-type setup: qmail + qmail-scanner 1.25 +
ClamAV.
I'm having a problem where at times about half of our messages are getting
0.0 scores from SA, even ones that I know should be triggering rules. I even
wrote a really stupid custom rule (test for the presence of th
