Re: SA Scoring... mysterious point loss

On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:20:41 -0400 David F. Skoll wrote: > On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 20:08:22 +0100 > RW wrote: > > > It is a bit more complicated than I thought though. Rounding > > towards zero produces sensible results for the 5.0 threshold, but it > > becomes more complicated if one needs to handl

Re: SA Scoring... mysterious point loss

On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 20:08:22 +0100 RW wrote: > It is a bit more complicated than I thought though. Rounding > towards zero produces sensible results for the 5.0 threshold, but it > becomes more complicated if one needs to handle threholds close to, or > below, zero and which aren't multiples of 0

Re: SA Scoring... mysterious point loss

On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 10:12:03 +0200 Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > I assume he knows about all that. Yet, being confronted with the > initial mystery of 4.9 vs 5.0 and a sneaky spam refusing to cross > that all-magic threshold, he seems to have forgotten about rounding. If you reread the original p

Re: SA Scoring... mysterious point loss

On Mon, 2013-09-16 at 00:59 +0100, RW wrote: > On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:19:12 -0400 Harry Putnam wrote: The real reason for what you're observing here is (as RW pointed out in a follow-up post), that SPF_SOFTFAIL has a score of 0.972 -- that, and you looking at the rounded scores in the brief summar

Re: SA Scoring... mysterious point loss

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 21:15:46 -0400 Harry Putnam wrote: > RW writes: > > I had a look into it, and it seems that rounding is handled in an > > unusual way. It starts by rounding to the nearest 0.1, and then > > subtracts 0.1 if the result is non-spam to avoid the case of: > > > > X-Spam-Status: N

Re: SA Scoring... mysterious point loss

RW writes: > On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:19:12 -0400 > Harry Putnam wrote: [...] >> I assumed it had something to do with rounding or something so I >> increased the score to 4.1 to get that message to break the spam level >> of 5. >> >> Now the same mail shows a total of 5.1 >> >> 4.1 is shown fo

Re: SA Scoring... mysterious point loss

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:19:12 -0400 Harry Putnam wrote: > SA is letting mail thru as ham that should be spam apparently based on > what is too low a score (for my mail) for URIBL_JP_SURBL which was > 1.9 by default. > > I pushed it up to 4. > > But then I see a report that shows a total score of

Re: SA Scoring

Mike Kenny wrote: > I have copied a mail to spa.mail and now I execute > > $ cat spam.mail|spamassassin > > which outputs along with the message: > > X-Spam-Flag: YES > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.5 (2006-08-29) on > mx4.mydomain.co.za > X-Spam-Level: *

RE: SA Scoring

how are you moving it to spam path location? _ From: Mike Kenny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 08, 2006 12:36 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org; GLUG Tech Subject: SA Scoring I have copied a mail to spa.mail and now I execute $ cat spam.mail|spamassassin which

Re: SA scoring my domain mail

Woops, my mistake. I hit reply, and the reply of course went to the OP. And not realizing, I changed it to the spamassassin group, but the OP posted to the correct forum, a mailscanner forum. My bad. :) Evan At 09:43 AM 11/16/2006, you wrote: At 08:53 AM 11/16/2006, you wrote: Hi all. Rece

Re: SA scoring my domain mail

On Thursday 16 November 2006 12:43 pm, Evan Platt wrote: > At 08:53 AM 11/16/2006, you wrote: > >Hi all. > > > >Recently, I upgraded from spamassassin-3.0.4 to spamassassin-3.1.7. > > Whereas previously I had whitelisted my domain so that SA wouldn't score > > mail coming from my domain, after the

Re: SA scoring my domain mail

At 08:53 AM 11/16/2006, you wrote: Hi all. Recently, I upgraded from spamassassin-3.0.4 to spamassassin-3.1.7. Whereas previously I had whitelisted my domain so that SA wouldn't score mail coming from my domain, after the upgrade it is. How can I correct this? I likely won't be much help, b

Re: SA scoring my domain mail

On Thursday 16 November 2006 9:49 am, Theo Van Dinter wrote: > On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 09:29:15AM -0500, Dimitri Yioulos wrote: > > Recently, I upgraded from spamassassin-3.0.4 tp spamassassin-3.1.7. > > Whereas previously I had whitelisted my domain so that SA wouldn't score > > mail coming from

Re: SA scoring my domain mail

On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 09:29:15AM -0500, Dimitri Yioulos wrote: > Recently, I upgraded from spamassassin-3.0.4 tp spamassassin-3.1.7. Whereas > previously I had whitelisted my domain so that SA wouldn't score mail coming > from my domain, after the upgrade it is. How can I correct this? You p

Re: SA scoring not labeling spam as {Spam?}

jason lingnau wrote: > > On Jan 18, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Matt Kettler wrote: > >> jason lingnau wrote: >> >>> Hi yall! , >>> >>> Great time reading this list , thanks for all the submissions! >>> >>> SA version 2.83/razor2 >> >> >> Erm, check that version number.. there are no SA version between 2.

Re: SA scoring not labeling spam as {Spam?}

On Jan 18, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Matt Kettler wrote: jason lingnau wrote: Hi yall! , Great time reading this list , thanks for all the submissions! SA version 2.83/razor2 Erm, check that version number.. there are no SA version between 2.66 and 2.99. centOS machine running latest version

Re: SA scoring not labeling spam as {Spam?}

jason lingnau wrote: > Hi yall! , > > Great time reading this list , thanks for all the submissions! > > SA version 2.83/razor2 Erm, check that version number.. there are no SA version between 2.66 and 2.99. > > Most spam of the spam SA scores ( 5 and over) is getting labeled as > {Spam?} but