Hi,
I've discovered several emails that hit DCC, most likely because they
contain just emails or are entirely empty, so I wanted to whitelist them.
However, I'm not sure how to write the checksums to the whiteclnt file so
they are consulted by dcc:
# /usr/bin/dccproc -QCw whiteclnt &
Perhaps just check your old notes? :-P
https://lists.apache.org/thread/6fspd1my9xjdjbz16zp7dk66vn44xccz
On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 10:42:35PM -0400, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm noticing DCC is triggering on emails with an empty body. I'd like to
> create a hash that
Hi,
> I'm noticing DCC is triggering on emails with an empty body. I'd like to
> create a hash that matches messages with an empty body and other simple
> messages.
>
> What am I doing wrong? I've tried it with a zero-length file as well as
> one with just a few
Hi,
I'm noticing DCC is triggering on emails with an empty body. I'd like to
create a hash that matches messages with an empty body and other simple
messages.
What am I doing wrong? I've tried it with a zero-length file as well as one
with just a few characters. It looks like I d
Please unsubscribe me from list
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 2:51 PM wrote:
> >>If you do, it's anyway disabled on --lint.
> >
> > It does not matter what happens when you use --lint, because it skips
> > network checks, including DCC.
>
> Yes, that&
>>If you do, it's anyway disabled on --lint.
>
> It does not matter what happens when you use --lint, because it skips
> network checks, including DCC.
Yes, that's what I said. It's disabled on --lint.
>>spamassassin --prefs-file=/etc/spamassassin/local.cf
and these indicate DCC is available.
I have "loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DCC" in
/etc/spamassassin/v310.pre
- try uncommenting it there.
On 19.02.24 08:17, glad.tent3...@fastmail.com wrote:
If you do, it's anyway disabled on --lint.
It does not matter what happe
> and these indicate DCC is available.
>
> I have "loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DCC" in
> /etc/spamassassin/v310.pre
>
> - try uncommenting it there.
If you do, it's anyway disabled on --lint.
grep "loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plug
On 18.02.24 14:21, glad.tent3...@fastmail.com wrote:
I'm hoping someone can help troubleshooting using DCC in SpamAssassin.
My setup isn't populating the "X-Spam-DCC: : " header.
I configured SpamAssassin to use DCC
cat local.cf
...
> Try this command for some real mail.eml
>
>spamassassin --prefs-file=/etc/spamassassin/local.cf -D dcc
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on
mail.MYDOMAIN.COM
X-Spam-Scanned: spamd.mail.MYDOMAIN.COM
X-Spam-S
Try this command for some real mail.eml
spamassassin --prefs-file=/etc/spamassassin/local.cf -D dcc Feb 18 21:10:36.754 [801727] warn: netset: cannot include 127.0.0.0/8 as
it has already been included
Feb 18 21:10:36.758 [801727] warn: netset: cannot include 172.16.0.0/12
as it has
Hello,
> try to increase dcc_timeout.
>
> # this works for me
> use_dcc 1
> dcc_home /var/dcc
> dcc_path /usr/local/bin/dccproc
> dcc_timeout 16
> add_header all DCC _DCCB_:_DCCR_
I tried values of 16, 30 & 100.
Same as before unfortunately.
No errors that
Hello,
try to increase dcc_timeout.
# this works for me
use_dcc 1
dcc_home /var/dcc
dcc_path /usr/local/bin/dccproc
dcc_timeout 16
add_header all DCC _DCCB_:_DCCR_
Martin
Hello,
I'm hoping someone can help troubleshooting using DCC in SpamAssassin.
My setup isn't populating the &
On Sun, Feb 18, 2024, at 2:47 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
> On 2024-02-18 at 14:21:41 UTC-0500 (Sun, 18 Feb 2024 14:21:41 -0500)
>
> is rumored to have said:
>
>> Feb 18 11:18:06.796 [6905] dbg: dcc: local tests only,
>> disabling DCC
>
> That seems
On 2024-02-18 at 14:21:41 UTC-0500 (Sun, 18 Feb 2024 14:21:41 -0500)
is rumored to have said:
Feb 18 11:18:06.796 [6905] dbg: dcc: local tests only,
disabling DCC
That seems like a clear explanation: your configuration has disabled
'net' tests. You se
Hello,
I'm hoping someone can help troubleshooting using DCC in SpamAssassin.
My setup isn't populating the "X-Spam-DCC: : " header.
I installed SpamAssassin 4.0.0
spamassassin -V
SpamAssassin version 4.0.0
running on Perl version 5
), thx for that suggestion. Let's hope it works to
remove this minor inconvenience :)
razor, pyzor, dcc is detecting if mails is mailed to more then one
recipients, is does not detect as so if its spam or not, so only
massmailed is sure
for bayes training it aswell needs to know ham mails, only sp
On 11/07/2022 15:44, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 11.07.22 12:57, Bert Van de Poel wrote:
A few times a month we have spam messages getting through, often in
German, that have some spam score but not enough to be
marked/discarded. Always these messages are marked by DCC, since
they'
On 11.07.22 12:57, Bert Van de Poel wrote:
A few times a month we have spam messages getting through, often in
German, that have some spam score but not enough to be
marked/discarded. Always these messages are marked by DCC, since
they're of course bulk spam, but it's also not uncom
Hi everyone,
A few times a month we have spam messages getting through, often in
German, that have some spam score but not enough to be marked/discarded.
Always these messages are marked by DCC, since they're of course bulk
spam, but it's also not uncommon to see Pyzor as well.
On 14.03.22 20:15, Alex wrote:
I'm seeing a lot of DCC/pyzor mail being marked as spam that shouldn't
be, and want to see what can be done to prevent that.
DCC contains fuzzy checksums of bulk messages, which means they have been
seen on the internet multiple times. This inclu
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 08:15:49PM -0400, Alex wrote:
>
> How do I generate that signature? I've been unable to find any
> instructions on how to do it.
https://www.dcc-servers.net/dcc/dcc-tree/dcc.html
dccproc -CQ < message
Add to /var/dcc/whiteclnt
"Hex ctype cksum
Hi,
I'm seeing a lot of DCC/pyzor mail being marked as spam that shouldn't
be, and want to see what can be done to prevent that.
For example, many emails with just an image attachment and an empty
body are hitting DCC. I thought I recalled a way to create a checksum
of these empty me
The DCC FAQ at https://www.dcc-servers.net/dcc/FAQ.html#license
describes the definitive ways to get any questions answered regarding
DCC licensing. Any answers you could get here would be conjecture and
anecdote.
I found a form on their website for licensing questions. Waiting to hear
back.
On 22 Apr 2021, at 9:20, Steve Dondley wrote:
Sorry if this is a bit off-topic.
More than a bit.
DCC is not owned, released, or bundled by the ASF SpamAssassin Project
or any other part of the ASF. The SpamAssassin project doesn't have any
control over DCC licensing or any parti
On 22.04.21 09:20, Steve Dondley wrote:
Sorry if this is a bit off-topic.
I'm looking into installing DCC (Distributed Checksum Clearninghouse)
software.
DCC has it's own users list.
I don't see anything in there about disallowing usage of the software
by "managed mail
Sorry if this is a bit off-topic.
I'm looking into installing DCC (Distributed Checksum Clearninghouse)
software.
The page at https://www.dcc-servers.net/dcc/INSTALL.html says:
"The free license is intended to cover individuals and organizations
including Internet service provi
--bindir=/usr/local/bin \
> --libexecdir=/usr/local/libexec/dcc \
> --homedir=/var/lib/dcc \
Yeah, the dcc configure script is directly substituting $libexecdir etc
into the output, which isn't going to work unless the output is a
makefile or something else that can do shell-like variable sub
On 6/11/20 9:19 AM, PGNet Dev wrote:
> DCC is built/installed,
>
> wget http://www.dcc-servers.net/dcc/source/dcc.tar.Z
> tar zxvf dcc.tar.Z
> cd dcc-2.3.167
> ./configure \
> --disable-server \
> --disable-dccm \
> --
ng well enough; tho, on spamd restart, I see in logs,
Jun 11 08:06:49 mx spamd[10742]: util: refusing to untaint suspicious
path: "${exec_prefix}/lib"
commenting out,
v310.pre
- loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DCC
+ loadplugin Mail::S
Great news.
Everything looks good at this end.
Thanks to all for your input.
Judy.
From: Kevin A. McGrail
Sent: 23 May 2020 23:09
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: dcc-servers.net seems to have gone away
Yes, all fixed. There was an issue with
Yes, all fixed. There was an issue with a domain name renewal.
On 5/23/2020 2:33 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>>> On Sat, 23 May 2020 at 09:55, hospice admin
>>> wrote:
>>> > Looks like DCC/Rhyolite has stopped working. First noticed problems
>>
On Sat, 23 May 2020 at 09:55, hospice admin
wrote:
> Looks like DCC/Rhyolite has stopped working. First noticed problems
> around 19:30 last night UK time.
>
> Problem seems to be that DNS for dcc-servers.net has gone away. Have
> checked with the likes of mxtoolbox and intoDNS
Well, crud. Anyone have a replica from before the records dropped they
would be willing to share out?
On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 5:12 AM Dominic Raferd
wrote:
> On Sat, 23 May 2020 at 09:55, hospice admin
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Gang,
> >
> > Looks like DCC/Rhyol
On Sat, 23 May 2020 at 09:55, hospice admin wrote:
>
> Hi Gang,
>
> Looks like DCC/Rhyolite has stopped working. First noticed problems around
> 19:30 last night UK time.
>
> Problem seems to be that DNS for dcc-servers.net has gone away. Have checked
> with the likes
Hi Gang,
Looks like DCC/Rhyolite has stopped working. First noticed problems around
19:30 last night UK time.
Problem seems to be that DNS for dcc-servers.net has gone away. Have checked
with the likes of mxtoolbox and intoDNS and they appear to agree.
When I do a 'whois' for th
On 22.10.19 16:24, hg user wrote:
I'm wondering if the plugins listed in the subject may help with messages
that are not in english...
yes.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tut
Hi,
I'm wondering if the plugins listed in the subject may help with messages
that are not in english...
Hi,
> $ /var/lib/dcc/bin/dccproc -QCw whiteclnt < dcc-empty
> X-DCC--Metrics: mail01.example.com 1102; Body=0 Fuz1=0 Fuz2=many
> reported: 0 checksum server
> env_From: d41d8cd9 8f00b204 e9800998 ecf8427e
>
Hi,
This is perhaps off-topic, but does anyone have any tips on how to
whitelist a message that hits DCC? I believe it's hitting DCC because
it has an empty body.
I've created digests for pyzor and razor, but DCC is much more involved.
I've tried generate a checksum, but I don&#x
On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 16:24:46 +0300
Reio Remma wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I'm curious, if I turn on DCC learning, does it learn with both the
> learn and report options to sa-learn or only report?
There are two types of DCC test, most people only use the free version
which is purely
On 15.06.18 16:24, Reio Remma wrote:
I'm curious, if I turn on DCC learning, does it learn with both the
learn and report options to sa-learn or only report?
sa-learn only trains bayes.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to rece
Hello!
I'm curious, if I turn on DCC learning, does it learn with both the
learn and report options to sa-learn or only report?
Thanks!
Reio
On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:52:32 -0500
Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a bunch of rules that rely on the results of pyzor, razor or
> DCC. The problem is that they also match on an empty or nearly empty
> body.
You can use
pyzor local_whitelist < email.txt
at very least it&#x
Alex skrev den 2017-12-15 19:52:
Other ideas?
whitelist ?, dcc have whitelist, pyzor have whitelist if you run own
pyzord, razor have whitelist
how ?, all the 3 seen before content checkers should know your
internal_networks ips just like spamassin does
its not relevant imho on empty
Hi,
I have a bunch of rules that rely on the results of pyzor, razor or
DCC. The problem is that they also match on an empty or nearly empty
body.
I believe we may have discussed something similar in the past, but is
there a way to avoid these digest rules from hitting on empty emails
or emails
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 13:54:27 -0700
mro...@insiberia.net wrote:
> On 2016-10-25 05:59, RW wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 06:25:18 +
> > mro...@insiberia.net wrote:
> >
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> Is there any up-to-date howto available for
On 2016-10-25 05:59, RW wrote:
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 06:25:18 +
mro...@insiberia.net wrote:
Hi everyone,
Is there any up-to-date howto available for DCC installation for use
with SpamAssassin?
Nothing will have changed.
If nothing else has changed, many systems are now using systemd
On 25.10.16 06:25, mro...@insiberia.net wrote:
Is there any up-to-date howto available for DCC installation for use
with SpamAssassin?
do you buid packages and all software on your own?
or do you use any kind of software distribution?
I see some old questions about DCC on this list and mostly
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 06:25:18 +
mro...@insiberia.net wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Is there any up-to-date howto available for DCC installation for use
> with SpamAssassin?
Nothing will have changed.
> I see some old questions about DCC on this list and mostly old
> howto&#x
Hi everyone,
Is there any up-to-date howto available for DCC installation for use
with SpamAssassin?
I see some old questions about DCC on this list and mostly old howto's
on the web. Best I found was this:
http://wbitt.com/knowledge/how-to-tutorials/136-spamassassindccrazor-howt
On Apr 29, 2016, at 1:12 PM, RW wrote:
I got the same, it only records the number scanned. I'm not sure what
the reason for the zeros is, possibly it's because dccifd isn't
working as a proxy.
On 29.04.16 17:59, @lbutlr wrote:
Thanks. I’ll just ignore the log line.
you can simply stop runn
On Apr 29, 2016, at 1:12 PM, RW wrote:
> I got the same, it only records the number scanned. I'm not sure what
> the reason for the zeros is, possibly it's because dccifd isn't
> working as a proxy.
Thanks. I’ll just ignore the log line.
--
"Alas, earwax."
On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:39:29 -0600
@lbutlr wrote:
> On Apr 28, 2016, at 2:30 PM, RW wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 11:58:47 -0600
> > @lbutlr wrote:
> >
> >
> >>> do you see any DCC_CHECK in spam headers?
> >>
> >> A few, but they always seem to be “1.1”
> >
> > What were you expecti
On 27.04.16 18:38, @lbutlr wrote:
I have DCC setup and enabled in SpamAssasin, but the only thing I see logged in
maillog each day is:
00:00:00 mail dccifd[7397]: 1.3.158 detected 0 spam, ignored for 0, rejected for 0,
and discarded for 0 targets among 0 total messages for targets
On Apr
the daily log line specifies a number of blocked messages (always 0) I
expected some variation in something. As it stands, the log line appears to be
entirely useless.
Just a guess here, but since there are two ways of calling DCC, maybe SA
is using one method and the log entry is giving
On Apr 28, 2016, at 2:30 PM, RW wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 11:58:47 -0600
> @lbutlr wrote:
>
>
>>> do you see any DCC_CHECK in spam headers?
>>
>> A few, but they always seem to be “1.1”
>
> What were you expecting? Like almost all SA rules it has a fixed score.
Since the daily log line
folder,
In the context of SpamAssassin tests, a third is not "a few". But bear
in mind that it's a bulk mail test rather than a spam test, so it can
hit a lot of ham.
> should I add
>
> dcc_home /var/dcc/
It shouldn't make much difference if this is the default. Try running
"cdcc homedir" to find out.
> On Apr 28, 2016, at 2:34 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> On 27.04.16 18:38, @lbutlr wrote:
>> I have DCC setup and enabled in SpamAssasin, but the only thing I see logged
>> in maillog each day is:
>>
>> 00:00:00 mail dccifd[7397]: 1.3.158 detecte
On 27.04.16 18:38, @lbutlr wrote:
I have DCC setup and enabled in SpamAssasin, but the only thing I see logged in
maillog each day is:
00:00:00 mail dccifd[7397]: 1.3.158 detected 0 spam, ignored for 0, rejected for 0,
and discarded for 0 targets among 0 total messages for targets
which
I have DCC setup and enabled in SpamAssasin, but the only thing I see logged in
maillog each day is:
00:00:00 mail dccifd[7397]: 1.3.158 detected 0 spam, ignored for 0, rejected
for 0, and discarded for 0 targets among 0 total messages for targets
which appears every day at midnight.
It it
On 02.03.16 12:48, Roman Gelfand wrote:
>I have awl disabled and dcc checks configured. Why, sometimes,
>spamassassin doesn't do dcc checks?
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:50 PM Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
that has nothing to do with AWL.
You have already asked in the DCC mailing
Am 03.03.2016 um 00:07 schrieb Roman Gelfand:
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:54 PM RW mailto:rwmailli...@googlemail.com>> wrote:
On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:48:18 -0500
Roman Gelfand wrote:
> I have awl disabled and dcc checks configured. Why, sometimes,
> spamassassin do
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:50 PM Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
> On 02.03.16 12:48, Roman Gelfand wrote:
> >I have awl disabled and dcc checks configured. Why, sometimes,
> >spamassassin doesn't do dcc checks?
>
> that has nothing to do with AWL.
>
> You have alrea
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:54 PM RW wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:48:18 -0500
> Roman Gelfand wrote:
>
> > I have awl disabled and dcc checks configured. Why, sometimes,
> > spamassassin doesn't do dcc checks?
>
> What makes you think that it doesn't?
On 02.03.16 12:48, Roman Gelfand wrote:
I have awl disabled and dcc checks configured. Why, sometimes,
spamassassin doesn't do dcc checks?
that has nothing to do with AWL.
You have already asked in the DCC mailing list (and I have replied), why did
you interrupt the conversation and br
On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:48:18 -0500
Roman Gelfand wrote:
> I have awl disabled and dcc checks configured. Why, sometimes,
> spamassassin doesn't do dcc checks?
What makes you think that it doesn't?
I have awl disabled and dcc checks configured. Why, sometimes,
spamassassin doesn't do dcc checks?
From: sha...@shanew.net
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:02:59 -0500 (CDT)
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, John Hardin wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Shane Williams wrote:
>
>> Two examples that I know are legitimate senders, but get caught by DCC
>> (and pyzor in som
>> On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Shane Williams wrote:
>>
>>> Two examples that I know are legitimate senders, but get caught by DCC
>>> (and pyzor in some cases) and other rules that push them over the
>>> threshold are the SourceForge.net Project of the Month
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, sha...@shanew.net wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Shane Williams wrote:
> Two examples that I know are legitimate senders, but get caught by DCC
> (and pyzor in some cases) and other rules that push them over the
> thre
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Shane Williams wrote:
Two examples that I know are legitimate senders, but get caught by DCC
(and pyzor in some cases) and other rules that push them over the
threshold are the SourceForge.net Project of the Month list and
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Shane Williams wrote:
Two examples that I know are legitimate senders, but get caught by DCC
(and pyzor in some cases) and other rules that push them over the
threshold are the SourceForge.net Project of the Month list and
various Netflix emails to customers (New Arrivals
I know it's not a SpamAssassin specific question, but I suspect there
are more sophisticated DCC users collected here than anywhere else.
Bottom line, can someone explain in not-overly jargony language what
the actual dcc whitelist entries should look like (ideally with
examples), as we
On 21.04.15 18:49, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
I just wanted to give a thank you to everyone who responded to this
thread. I clearly misunderstood what DCC does, and it now has little
value to me as a scoring item.
Am 22.04.2015 um 12:47 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
I recommend you putting
Am 22.04.2015 um 12:47 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
On 21.04.15 18:49, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
I just wanted to give a thank you to everyone who responded to this
thread. I clearly misunderstood what DCC does, and it now has little
value to me as a scoring item.
I recommend you putting
On 21.04.15 18:49, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
I just wanted to give a thank you to everyone who responded to this
thread. I clearly misunderstood what DCC does, and it now has little
value to me as a scoring item.
I recommend you putting mass senders to whitelist. It's perfect scoring
Hi Quanah,
On 22/04/15 02:52, [*] Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Tuesday, April 14, 2015 11:05 PM +0100 Steve Freegard
wrote:
Just because *you* can't find any sense in it; others might be able to.
For example:
meta __FSL_ANY_BULK ((DCC_CHECK || RAZOR2_CHECK ||
PYZOR_CHECK) && !
--On Tuesday, April 14, 2015 11:05 PM +0100 Steve Freegard
wrote:
On 14/04/15 19:45, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 14.04.2015 um 20:26 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
On 4/14/2015 2:16 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
DCC isn't designed to tell you if a message is spam/not-spam. It's a
*BULK*
I just wanted to give a thank you to everyone who responded to this thread.
I clearly misunderstood what DCC does, and it now has little value to me as
a scoring item.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source
On 04/17/2015 01:17 PM, RW wrote:
On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 15:06:42 -0700 (PDT)
John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 16 Apr 2015, RW wrote:
I don't see why it's not auto generated - perhaps with a cap of 1.5.
How long are signatures kept in the DCC database? Masscheck uses a
corpus that cover
On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 15:06:42 -0700 (PDT)
John Hardin wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2015, RW wrote:
>
> > I don't see why it's not auto generated - perhaps with a cap of 1.5.
>
> How long are signatures kept in the DCC database? Masscheck uses a
> corpus that cover
I don't see why it's not auto generated - perhaps with a cap of 1.5.
On 16.04.15 15:06, John Hardin wrote:
How long are signatures kept in the DCC database? Masscheck uses a
corpus that covers a couple of years. If the DCC signatures expire
within a month or two then that woul
On Thu, 16 Apr 2015, RW wrote:
I don't see why it's not auto generated - perhaps with a cap of 1.5.
How long are signatures kept in the DCC database? Masscheck uses a corpus
that covers a couple of years. If the DCC signatures expire within a month
or two then that would skew the
On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 07:14:12 -0400
Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> > Vernon, do you have a recommended score for the implementation of
> > DCC with SA? There are concerns that bulk mail from good senders
> > has been hit by DCC which is completely by design.
>
> Vernon repl
Am 16.04.2015 um 17:45 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
On 04/16/2015 02:15 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
I don't agree with moving a DCC rule into a __* rule or setting
its score to a near zero. I find DCC hits useful as they are now:
contributing to the overall score, bit not so large as to m
On 04/16/2015 02:15 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
I don't agree with moving a DCC rule into a __* rule or setting
its score to a near zero. I find DCC hits useful as they are now:
contributing to the overall score, bit not so large as to make
a major effect by themselves.
Am 16.04.2015 um
Am 16.04.2015 um 14:55 schrieb Axb:
On 04/16/2015 02:15 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
I don't agree with moving a DCC rule into a __* rule or setting
its score to a near zero. I find DCC hits useful as they are now:
contributing to the overall score, bit not so large as to make
a major effe
On 04/16/2015 02:15 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
I don't agree with moving a DCC rule into a __* rule or setting
its score to a near zero. I find DCC hits useful as they are now:
contributing to the overall score, bit not so large as to make
a major effect by themselves.
FWIW; I totally
Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Vernon, do you have a recommended score for the implementation of
DCC with SA? There are concerns that bulk mail from good senders has
been hit by DCC which is completely by design.
Vernon replied off-list so I wanted to bring the relevant portion back
to the list
Vernon, do you have a recommended score for the implementation of
> DCC with SA? There are concerns that bulk mail from good senders has
> been hit by DCC which is completely by design.
Vernon replied off-list so I wanted to bring the relevant portion back
to the list:
"My general
x27;t look like masscheck is testing it at all, so sandbox rules
meta'd with it might be pointless...
http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20150411-r1672844-n/DCC_CHECK
Vernon, do you have a recommended score for the implementation of DCC
with SA? There are concerns that bulk mail from good senders
that
On 14.04.15 20:49, Reindl Harald wrote:
nobody is perfect, but if i would be uncertain i just won't say
anything - in case of DCC indeed i was wrong and so i change my
optinion about DCC to questionable in general because a legit,
double-optin newsletter, facebook notification, twitter noti
, but if i would be uncertain i just won't say
anything - in case of DCC indeed i was wrong and so i change my
optinion about DCC to questionable in general because a legit,
double-optin newsletter, facebook notification, twitter notification
and so on don't deserve any penalt
John Hardin wrote:
[...] The 1.1 points is hardcoded:
50_scores.cf:score DCC_CHECK0 1.1 0 1.1
It's reasonable to argue that this score should be informational only,
and that it should only be scored meaningfully in metas.
Steve Freegard wrote:
However - I'll readily agree with yo
lable.
I am not sure DCC is masschecked, to be honest...
It's not. The 1.1 points is hardcoded:
50_scores.cf:score DCC_CHECK0 1.1 0 1.1
It's reasonable to argue that this score should be informational only, and
that it should only be scored meaningfully in metas.
On 4/14/2015 5:05 PM, Steve Freegard wrote:
However - I'll readily agree with you that DCC_CHECK adding score to
all bulk mail isn't that useful, however that is what the mass-checker
has decided works best with the corpus of mail available.
I am not sure DCC is masschecked, to be honest...
On 14/04/15 19:45, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 14.04.2015 um 20:26 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
On 4/14/2015 2:16 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
DCC isn't designed to tell you if a message is spam/not-spam. It's a
*BULK* indicator. e.g. have lots of people seen this message?
that is simpl
won't say anything
- in case of DCC indeed i was wrong and so i change my optinion about
DCC to questionable in general because a legit, double-optin newsletter,
facebook notification, twitter notification and so on don't deserve any
penalty just because of it existence
signa
On 4/14/2015 2:45 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
because i can't find any sense in give bulk mail just because it is
bulk mail - indepdendent of subscribed, double-optin and what not - a
penalty
however, the real problem of all the hashing services is the way how
personalized parts get stripped and
1 - 100 of 577 matches
Mail list logo
