Steve Lake wrote:
> Ok, I'm starting to get a bunch of spams coming through that
> are tagged as white listed, so all I can think of is that they somehow
> got into the auto white list.
Well, First, let's clear up what you mean by "tagged as whitelisted"..
th
Ok, I'm starting to get a bunch of spams coming through that are
tagged as white listed, so all I can think of is that they somehow got into
the auto white list. First, how do I turn it off, and second how do I
clear the list? I know I did this once long ago, but that was lik
Gary G. Taylor wrote:
>
> And here is a header from a beliefnet (gag) message SA caught:
>
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP,
> HTML_80_90,HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02,HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_ONLY
> autolearn=no version=3.0.4
>
>
> How the fs
I have noticed that several spams are getting through because they have
entries in the Auto White List, sometimes with very large numbers.
Here is a sample header from a message not flagged as spam:
Return-Path:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mailrelay03.walmart.com (161.170.254.
Chris wrote:
>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AwlWrongWay
>>
>
> Thanks Matt, I knew that it wasn't a 'real' whitelist, just didn't realize
> an address would get added by running it through spamassassin more than
> once.
>
It's an averager.. In order to track averages every addr
On Tuesday 21 March 2006 11:19 pm, Matt Kettler wrote:
> Chris wrote:
> > I had a FN awhile ago that I ran through spamassassin -t and it gave
> > the same score as the original:
> >
> > score=4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99,HTML_MESSAGE,
> > SARE_HTML_TITLE_LWORD,SARE_UNSUB18
> >
> > Then
Chris wrote:
> I had a FN awhile ago that I ran through spamassassin -t and it gave the
> same score as the original:
>
> score=4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99,HTML_MESSAGE,
> SARE_HTML_TITLE_LWORD,SARE_UNSUB18
>
> Then I ran it through spamassassin -r and for some reason it picked up the
: address is in the auto white-list
I've noticed that this happens each time I run a message through
spamassassin -r. Is there a reason for this?
--
Chris
Registered Linux User 283774 http://counter.li.org
21:29:19 up 22 days, 1:32, 2 users, load average: 0.36, 0.52, 0.94
Mandriva Linux 10.1 Off
Status: No, score=0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=ham
version=3.0.3
X-Spam-Report: * 0.7 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
Isn't being in the the auto white-list a good thing?
-Matt
It's all somewhat explained here:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AwlWrongWay
jm
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Lenz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Spamassassin Users"
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 4:43 PM
Subject: auto white-list spam points?
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=ham
version=3.0.3
X-Spam-Report: * 0.7 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
Isn't being in the the auto white-list a good thing?
-Matt
On Tuesday 30 November 2004 10:57 am, Jerry wrote:
> >>I have some AWL's listed in my local.cf.
> >
> > You do? That's not likely true..
>
> In my local.cf I have the line"whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>
> Does this not keep all messages coming from our domain clear from being
> marked as s
I have some AWL's listed in my local.cf.
You do? That's not likely true..
In my local.cf I have the line"whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Does this not keep all messages coming from our domain clear from being
marked as spam?
At 12:42 PM 11/30/2004, Jerry wrote:
I have some AWL's listed in my local.cf.
You do? That's not likely true..
AWL has nothing to do with "whitelist_from" statements and the like. You
can't create AWL entries in your local.cf.
the AWL is the AUTOMATIC whitelist. It's just that.. automatic. You do
I have some AWL's listed in my local.cf. However they are getting a
postative score of 25 points and being marked as spam.
Shouldn't it be scoring the message with a negative score so it doesn't get
marked as spam?
At 07:38 PM 9/22/2004 -0400, Rick Macdougall wrote:
Yup, I understand how the whole AWL works but my problem is that border
line spam is being dropped to ham. Example: A normal markup of 5.6 and an
AWL score of -0.8 drops it below the average user required_hits of 5 and
does not get marked as s
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Yup, I understand how the whole AWL works but my problem is that border
line spam is being dropped to ham. Example: A normal markup of 5.6 and
an AWL score of -0.8 drops it below the average user required_hits of 5
and does not get marked as spam.
Right, but it's an avera
Matt Kettler wrote:
At 06:59 PM 9/22/2004, Rick Macdougall wrote:
I've upgraded two machines so far today and I'm seeing AWL hits that
*reduce* the score of obvious spam.
This in and of itself is not a problem, unless it's causing false
negatives.
It's impossible for the AWL to always give pos
At 06:59 PM 9/22/2004, Rick Macdougall wrote:
I've upgraded two machines so far today and I'm seeing AWL hits that
*reduce* the score of obvious spam.
This in and of itself is not a problem, unless it's causing false negatives.
It's impossible for the AWL to always give positive scores to spam, un
Hi,
Are there any large sites out there (ISPish) that actually use AWL ?
I've upgraded two machines so far today and I'm seeing AWL hits that
*reduce* the score of obvious spam. I didn't use AWL in the 2.6x series
because of this problem happening with that version as well but I
figured since
20 matches
Mail list logo
