Hello,
perhaps try setting
report_safe 0
Then, according to the documentation at ‘man Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf’,
a header ‘X-Spam-Report’ will be added that might just be what you need.
Hi,
It looks like I am using SA 4.0.0 on Ubuntu 23.x. I have looked for an
answer in Google-pedia, and it either does not exist or I am not able to
figure out the correct search term.
Is there a way to get a "spam report" or "expanded spam headers" from
spamassa
Got it. I thought it was a setup issue on my end. It didn't occur to me
that it could be a bug in hmailserver.
-
FROM: Groach
SENT: Friday, July 27, 2018 8:03 AM
TO: users@spamassassin.apache.org
SUBJECT: Re: Line breaks in X-Spam-Report
https://github.com/hmails
ilserver. Thanks.
>
>
>From: Reindl Harald
>Sent: Friday, July 27, 2018 4:33 AM
>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org; ad...@123.dynu.com
>Subject: Re: Line breaks in X-Spam-Report
>
>> they are there
>>
>> let me guess you use dbma
OK. That explains why I've seen it that way in some examples online.
I'm running hmailserver. Thanks.
From: Reindl Harald
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2018 4:33 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org; ad...@123.dynu.com
Subject: Re: Line breaks in X-Spam-Rep
Hello. I was wondering if there is a setting to force line breaks in
X-Spam-Report. It's kind of a trivial issue, but it would be so much easier
to read. Like below as an example (that I manually altered). Many thanks.
X-Spam-Report:
* 1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a rel
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 05:48:00 +0100
Benny Pedersen wrote:
> note:
>
> __ have no score need
> T_ must have socre, if not defined it defults to 1.0
An ordinary rule defaults to 1.0, a rule that start with T_ defaults to 0.01.
perl -p -i -e 's/__/T_/g' /usr/share/spamassassin/updates_spamassassin_org/*
This converts the rules. I'm doing something very interesting. It's
going to take a few days to see if it works.
I'm applying the same techniques of my evolution filter to the SA rule
names.
I extract the names and
On 2016-02-03 04:16, Marc Perkel wrote:
Never mind
are you elvis fan ? :=)
I found that if I change __ to T_ that it does what I want.
it does ?
note:
__ have no score need
T_ must have socre, if not defined it defults to 1.0
so did you try reading one of elvis records here:
perldo
You can do that but it requires editing all your rule files, altho then
you see those matches in all your reports.
If you just want to test one particular message, just use the -D option to
spamassassin and grep for ' got hit: '
Mar 11 21:51:44.203 [5074] dbg: rules: ran header rule __MIME_VE
Never mind
I found that if I change __ to T_ that it does what I want.
On 02/02/16 18:05, Marc Perkel wrote:
On 02/02/16 17:55, Marc Perkel wrote:
Normally SA creates a header that has a list of the names of rules
that matched. It skips the listing of hidden rules that start with __ .
On 02/02/16 17:55, Marc Perkel wrote:
Normally SA creates a header that has a list of the names of rules
that matched. It skips the listing of hidden rules that start with __ .
Is there a command where I can easily tell SA to include the hidden
rules in the report in the headers so I can see
Normally SA creates a header that has a list of the names of rules that
matched. It skips the listing of hidden rules that start with __ .
Is there a command where I can easily tell SA to include the hidden
rules in the report in the headers so I can see all of it?
--
Marc Perkel - Sales/Supp
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:14:37 -0400
Bill Cole wrote:
> You snipped out what I was specifically responding to:
>
> On 22 Jun 2015, at 21:45 , Michael B Allen wrote:
>
> > bayes_file_mode 0777
Ok, I misunderstood. I thought you were referring to things being run as
root.
On 24 Jun 2015, at 16:21, RW wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 22:42:09 -0400
Bill Cole wrote:
On 22 Jun 2015, at 21:45, Michael B Allen wrote:
So with a default install (CentOS 7 in my case and I suspect pretty
much all other systems), bayes will NOT just work by default unless
you explicitly mod
On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 22:42:09 -0400
Bill Cole wrote:
> On 22 Jun 2015, at 21:45, Michael B Allen wrote:
> > So with a default install (CentOS 7 in my case and I suspect pretty
> > much all other systems), bayes will NOT just work by default unless
> > you explicitly modify /etc/mail/spamassassin/l
On 23 Jun 2015, at 14:58, Michael B Allen wrote:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Bill Cole
wrote:
Yes, I want a system-wide bayes db. And I am running spamd and spamc
and I assume that is all working (but of course I have no idea if it
really is).
But I want users to be able to put spams th
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Bill Cole
wrote:
>> Yes, I want a system-wide bayes db. And I am running spamd and spamc
>> and I assume that is all working (but of course I have no idea if it
>> really is).
>>
>> But I want users to be able to put spams that get through into
>> ~/Maildir/.Learn
Am 23.06.2015 um 18:48 schrieb Bill Cole:
* sa-learn IS NOT THE RIGHT TOOL FOR LEARNING MESSAGES INTO A
SYSTEM-WIDE DB
says who? that below is the rsult of a customized sa-learn script for a
ton of users working like a charm on a spamass-milter setup for 10
months now
[root@mail-
On 23 Jun 2015, at 0:05, Michael B Allen wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:42 PM, Bill Cole
wrote:
On 22 Jun 2015, at 21:45, Michael B Allen wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Reindl Harald
wrote:
[root@www .spamassassin]# pwd
/var/log/spamassassin/.spamassassin
[root@www .spamassas
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 02:04:03 +0200
Reindl Harald wrote:
> oh and independent of not running as root you have only 301 spam
> messages while the docs clearly state you need at least 400 ham as
> well as 400 spam samples
It's 200 of each.
Am 23.06.2015 um 03:45 schrieb Michael B Allen:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
[root@www .spamassassin]# pwd
/var/log/spamassassin/.spamassassin
[root@www .spamassassin]# ls -la
total 1100
drwx-- 2 spamd spamd4096 Jun 22 19:42 .
drwx-- 3 spamd spamd4096
Am 23.06.2015 um 06:05 schrieb Michael B Allen:
Yes, I want a system-wide bayes db. And I am running spamd and spamc
and I assume that is all working (but of course I have no idea if it
really is).
But I want users to be able to put spams that get through into
~/Maildir/.LearnAsSpam and then, e
-token data: last expire
reduction count
I don't see any BAYES_ tags in X-Spam-Report.
how did you incporporate spamassassin to mail flow? Do you run milter,
amavisd, or simply spamc from procmailrc?
the bayes database you have shown belongs to user spamd, but the user does
not get all the
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:42 PM, Bill Cole
wrote:
> On 22 Jun 2015, at 21:45, Michael B Allen wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Reindl Harald
>> wrote:
[root@www .spamassassin]# pwd
/var/log/spamassassin/.spamassassin
[root@www .spamassassin]# ls -la
total 110
On 22 Jun 2015, at 21:45, Michael B Allen wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Reindl Harald
wrote:
[root@www .spamassassin]# pwd
/var/log/spamassassin/.spamassassin
[root@www .spamassassin]# ls -la
total 1100
drwx-- 2 spamd spamd4096 Jun 22 19:42 .
drwx-- 3 spamd spamd4096
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Michael B Allen wrote:
> and after running sa-learn again (as root) on ham, my db is now broken:
>
> [root@www .spamassassin]# sa-learn --dump magic
> bayes: bayes db version 0 is not able to be used, aborting! at
> /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Mail/SpamAssassin/Ba
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> [root@www .spamassassin]# pwd
>> /var/log/spamassassin/.spamassassin
>> [root@www .spamassassin]# ls -la
>> total 1100
>> drwx-- 2 spamd spamd4096 Jun 22 19:42 .
>> drwx-- 3 spamd spamd4096 Jun 7 00:41 ..
>> -rw--- 1 spa
0 0 0 non-token data: last expire
again: SA don'trun as root in any sane setup and hence won't use *that*
bayes-db
reduction count
[root@www .spamassassin]# cat ../../maillog | grep BAYES
[root@www .spamassassin]#
I don't see any BAYES_ tags in X-Spa
ssin]# cat ../../maillog | grep BAYES
[root@www .spamassassin]#
I don't see any BAYES_ tags in X-Spam-Report.
see above
I'm using a default SA install on CentOS 7.
what is a "default install"?
it can be spamass-milter or anything else calling SA
Do I need a local.cf? From looking a
.spamassassin]# cat ../../maillog | grep BAYES
[root@www .spamassassin]#
I don't see any BAYES_ tags in X-Spam-Report.
I'm using a default SA install on CentOS 7.
Do I need a local.cf? From looking at the docs, it claims bayes is
enabled by default. How can I check this?
Or maybe I
On 3/30/2012 6:59 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
I believe he is referring to a rule with multiple alternatives.
body SPAMWORD /\b(word1|word2|word3|word4)\b/
You know you have a match, but you don't know WHICH word matched. I
think debug mode is the only way to get this level of detail.
That, or
tested :)
>>>
>> Thats exactly what I am doing.
>> Its shows the description (from the 'describe' section) in the spam
>> report, not which word was matched.
> SPAMWORD is here the matched word name aswell
I believe he is referring to a rule with multiple al
Den 2012-03-30 11:52, Tom Kinghorn skrev:
On 30/03/2012 11:47, Benny Pedersen wrote:
body SPAMWORD /^spamword$/
describe SPAMWORD spamword found in body
score SPAMWORD 0.1
untested :)
Thats exactly what I am doing.
Its shows the description (from the 'describe' section) in the s
On 30/03/2012 11:47, Benny Pedersen wrote:
body SPAMWORD /^spamword$/
describe SPAMWORD spamword found in body
score SPAMWORD 0.1
untested :)
Thats exactly what I am doing.
Its shows the description (from the 'describe' section) in the spam
report, not which word was matched.
Thanks
Tom
Den 2012-03-30 10:34, Tom Kinghorn skrev:
Good morning list.
If I have a body rule checking for various banned words in a message
body, is there a way to indicate which word matched in the
spam-report?
eg: when an IP is matched against an RBL, the ip is shown in the
spam-report.
body
Good morning list.
If I have a body rule checking for various banned words in a message
body, is there a way to indicate which word matched in the spam-report?
eg: when an IP is matched against an RBL, the ip is shown in the
spam-report.
I would like to do the same for a text rule.
Is
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 04:38:36 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>
Please keep the thread on-list, unless you definitely intend to
contact
> me personally. Even "topic solved" posts like this are
worthwhile to
> have on the list.
>
> On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 19:58
+, Paul Hugill wrote:
>
>>
Please keep the thread on-list, unless you definitely intend to contact
me personally. Even "topic solved" posts like this are worthwhile to
have on the list.
On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 19:58 +, Paul Hugill wrote:
> Looks like that will do the job perfectly, thanks for pointing me in
> the right di
On 2011/04/25 05:01, Paul Hugill wrote:
Hi All,
I have SA (v3.2.3) installed along with hMailServer and it is working great
but I just wanted to check if you can make changes to the default headers
that are inherited on the spam report.
I would like to include an extra one so that this header
ough, just in case someone has an idea...
>
> I have hMailServer running and passing the emails to spamd when emails
> are received.
>
> The header 'X-hMailServer-ExternalAccount:' is added
> to incoming email if it is pulled from a pop account and put into the
> mailb
rs that are
inherited on the spam report.
>
> You can, though slightly limited. See
the 'add_header' option and the
> section Template Tags in the Conf docs.
>
Thanks Karsten
I had looked at that but I don't think it does quite what
I want.
I only want to add the hea
On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 13:01 +0100, Paul Hugill wrote:
> I have SA (v3.2.3) installed along with hMailServer and it is working
> great but I just wanted to check if you can make changes to the
> default headers that are inherited on the spam report.
You can, though slightly limited
Hi All,
I have SA (v3.2.3) installed along with hMailServer and it is
working great but I just wanted to check if you can make changes to the
default headers that are inherited on the spam report.
I would like to
include an extra one so that this header 'X-hMailServer-ExternalAccount
On 05/13/2010 04:49 PM, RW wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2010 09:42:17 +0530
Supun Rathnayake wrote:
Is there a way that the standard spamassassin can generate this type
of spam report which is explaining the rule applied, other than the
rule name only.
You can add one of the following
On Thu, 13 May 2010 09:42:17 +0530
Supun Rathnayake wrote:
> Is there a way that the standard spamassassin can generate this type
> of spam report which is explaining the rule applied, other than the
> rule name only.
>
You can add one of the following:
add_header all Rep
Hi everybody,
we have been using and enjoying spamassassin for years now, and recently
received an email abuse report/complain from an external party.
It seems that the external party is also using spamassassin in some form
in their spam filtering systems, according to the spam report header
> > > Is there a directive to change the way X-Spam-Report formats in the
> > > header of mail?
> > > Currently I get a single X-Spam-Report line wrapped;
> > >
> > > X-Spam-Report: * -1.4 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via
> > >
> > On 01.08.09 07:01, router backup wrote:
> >> Is there a directive to change the way X-Spam-Report formats in the
> >> header of mail?
> >> Currently I get a single X-Spam-Report line wrapped;
> >>
> >> X-Spam-Report: * -1.4 ALL_TRUSTED Pass
2009/8/1 Matus UHLAR - fantomas :
> On 01.08.09 07:01, router backup wrote:
>> Is there a directive to change the way X-Spam-Report formats in the
>> header of mail?
>> Currently I get a single X-Spam-Report line wrapped;
>>
>> X-Spam-Report: * -1.4 ALL_TRUSTED
On 01.08.09 07:01, router backup wrote:
> Is there a directive to change the way X-Spam-Report formats in the
> header of mail?
> Currently I get a single X-Spam-Report line wrapped;
>
> X-Spam-Report: * -1.4 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via
> SMTP * 2.2 H
Hello,
Is there a directive to change the way X-Spam-Report formats in the
header of mail?
Currently I get a single X-Spam-Report line wrapped;
X-Spam-Report: * -1.4 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via
SMTP * 2.2 HIDE_WIN_STATUS RAW: Javascript to hide URLs in browser * 1.3
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 12:21 +0200, Matus UHLAR wrote:
> I often receive see mail where X-Spam-Report header is longer than 80
> characters. This causes mutt to re-wrap the header, which causes the header
> be hardly readable. Since SA already wraps other headers, can we consider
> that
Hello,
I often receive see mail where X-Spam-Report header is longer than 80
characters. This causes mutt to re-wrap the header, which causes the header
be hardly readable. Since SA already wraps other headers, can we consider
that as a bug or does that have an reason/option to tune?
Examples
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 22:38 -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
>
> To follow-up on this suggestion...
>
>
>> That said, why add code to sa-learn when spamassassin can already do
>> something even more complete. Try feeding the message "spamassassin -r
>> --add-to-blacklist
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 22:38 -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
To follow-up on this suggestion...
> That said, why add code to sa-learn when spamassassin can already do
> something even more complete. Try feeding the message "spamassassin -r
> --add-to-blacklist".
It seems (looking at -D output) that
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 22:38 -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
> That said, why add code to sa-learn when spamassassin can already do
> something even more complete. Try feeding the message "spamassassin -r
> --add-to-blacklist".
Ahhh. I was mistakenly thinking that sa-learn == [ update-bayes
datab
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 18:35 -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
>> ie: you
>> can't tell sa-learn a message is spam and have it apply that information
>> in any way to the AWL. I guess that's really what my point was, and I
>> expressed it poorly.
>>
>
> I guess as the O
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 18:35 -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
> ie: you
> can't tell sa-learn a message is spam and have it apply that information
> in any way to the AWL. I guess that's really what my point was, and I
> expressed it poorly.
I guess as the OP of this thread, my point was that why sho
mouss wrote:
>
>>> - is it enough to pass few messages? (in short, does "manual" training
>>> have more "weight" than automatic awl learning?)
>>>
>>>
>> There's no such thing as manual training of the AWL. Actually, there's
>> no such thing as "training" for it either.
>>
>> The AWL aver
Matt Kettler a écrit :
>> I am thinking about this case: Joe the spammer bombs you with mail that
>> is not detected as spam. he gets a negative awl.
> That statement implies that there's a "score" for the user in the AWL.
>
> The AWL score varies with what the current messages pre-awl score. The
"Brian J. Murrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
> sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
> that future uses of the AWL for that spammer will push the overall spam
> score up?
And also useful[1] for t
Matt Kettler wrote:
> If a spammer is using the same sending address over and over again,
> blacklist them entirely.
>
> That said, I've never seen a spammer re-use the same address twice.
Doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen – only that you’re not on any
“narrowcast” lists (e.g. “Email 200,000 British
mouss wrote:
> Matt Kettler a écrit :
>
>> mouss wrote:
>>
>>> Matt Kettler a écrit :
>>>
>>>
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
> sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for t
Matt Kettler a écrit :
> mouss wrote:
>> Matt Kettler a écrit :
>>
>>> Brian J. Murrell wrote:
>>>
If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
that future uses of the AWL for that spam
mouss wrote:
> Matt Kettler a écrit :
>
>> Brian J. Murrell wrote:
>>
>>> If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
>>> sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
>>> that future uses of the AWL for that spammer will push the overall spam
>
Matt Kettler a écrit :
> Brian J. Murrell wrote:
>> If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
>> sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
>> that future uses of the AWL for that spammer will push the overall spam
>> score up?
>>
>> Thots?
>>
>
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 17:38 +, Nigel Frankcom wrote:
> Is Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SAGrey part of the stat SA set? Neither
> yum nor CPAN seem to be able to find it here... though that could
> easily be down to user error.
Google finds it quite easily. ;)
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassas
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:56:58 -0500, Jeff Mincy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> From: Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 23:48:57 -0500
>
> Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> > If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
> > sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful
From: Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 23:48:57 -0500
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
> sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
> that future uses of the AWL for th
On Wed, December 3, 2008 05:48, Matt Kettler wrote:
> That said, I've never seen a spammer re-use the same address twice.
i have :-)
olso why spf / dkim whitelist is the way to go, let spammers try to
get whitelisted
microsoft got it wroung with "Block Sender" :)
--
Benny Pedersen
Need more
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
> sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
> that future uses of the AWL for that spammer will push the overall spam
> score up?
>
> Thots?
>
If a spammer is using the same s
If I get a spam and I need to have SA learn that it's spam with
sa-learn, wouldn't it be useful to also skew the AWL for that sender so
that future uses of the AWL for that spammer will push the overall spam
score up?
Thots?
b.
Matt wrote:
> Is there a way to tell Spamassassin to add the detailed X-Spam-Report
> to every message rather then just those that have "X-Spam-Status:
> Yes"? Reason being is I want an easier way to study junk messages
> that get by Spamassassin.
Add this to your local
Matt wrote:
Is there a way to tell Spamassassin to add the detailed X-Spam-Report
to every message rather then just those that have "X-Spam-Status:
Yes"? Reason being is I want an easier way to study junk messages
that get by Spamassassin.
this depends on how you are running sp
Is there a way to tell Spamassassin to add the detailed X-Spam-Report
to every message rather then just those that have "X-Spam-Status:
Yes"? Reason being is I want an easier way to study junk messages
that get by Spamassassin.
Matt
I talked with Amy offline and she sent me the raw message. I figured
out what happened:
FRT_ROLEX fired (at 3.1 points), as it did when kintera evaluated:
[11035] dbg: rules: ran body rule FRT_ROLEX ==> got hit: "Roll Ex"
Searching in the message, I found a list with "... Honor Roll" follow
Hi Amy,
At 10:45 12-06-2008, Amy Marcott wrote:
I was told by Kintera, our email service, to email this address
regarding a problem I'm having with my spam score report. A report
Usually, it's up to your email service provider to deal with such questions.
http://spamassassin.apache.org/users.h
On 12.06.08 13:45, Amy Marcott wrote:
> I was told by Kintera, our email service, to email this address regarding a
> problem I'm having with my spam score report. A report is generated with each
> test email we send to ourselves via Kintera. The report lists things that may
> trigger high spam sco
I was told by Kintera, our email service, to email this address
regarding a problem I'm having with my spam score report. A report is
generated with each test email we send to ourselves via Kintera. The
report lists things that may trigger high spam scores. I was given the
report below fo
I was told by Kintera, our email service, to email this address regarding a
problem I'm having with my spam score report. A report is generated with each
test email we send to ourselves via Kintera. The report lists things that may
trigger high spam scores. I was given the report below for an email
mouss wrote:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 11.03.08 12:16, Jay Langley wrote:
Below I have offered the content of my spam score report generated by
Spam Assassin. We are Kintera subscribers. Problem is I don't know
how to make changes in the text that will result in a better score.
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 11.03.08 12:16, Jay Langley wrote:
Below I have offered the content of my spam score report generated by
Spam Assassin. We are Kintera subscribers. Problem is I don't know
how to make changes in the text that will result in a better score.
you shoul
On 11.03.08 12:16, Jay Langley wrote:
> Below I have offered the content of my spam score report generated by
> Spam Assassin. We are Kintera subscribers. Problem is I don't know
> how to make changes in the text that will result in a better score.
you should turn on network rules, allow plugi
Greetings,
Below I have offered the content of my spam score report generated by
Spam Assassin. We are Kintera subscribers. Problem is I don't know
how to make changes in the text that will result in a better score.
Could you send me someplace to learn what different scores mean and how
to
So it looks like Entire Message doesn't let you search header content.
Anybody found a way to reliably search on the X-Spam-Report or X-Spam-
Status in Mail.app?
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 5:32 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: How to get Spam report in header?
>
> We use MailScanner and Spamassassin.
>
> Our email has a header line as fol
AFAIK: No there is no way.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 5:32 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: How to get Spam report in header?
We use MailScanner and Spamassassin.
Our email has a header line as
'Spam-Report' as in the example below?
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=9.7 required=6.0 tests=DCC_CHECK,
DIGEST_MULTIPLE,
RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100, RAZOR2_CHECK,
RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL, RCVD_IN_WHOIS_INVALID, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY
autolearn=no
version=3.1.8, No
X-S
tical words.
Is there a place, where I can find detailled info about the X-Spam-Report?
The X-Spam-Report contains the names of the rules, and their scores &
descriptions. I don't think you can get more detailed that that about
the X-Spam-Report. If you want to know what the rul
At 14:02 12-07-2007, Bernd Klein wrote:
I am not sure, if my email was sent this morning. I received no replies, so
there is a good chance that it did not make it's way into the mailing list.
[snip]
I found out, that many of those emails have triggered "FH_HAS_XID Has X-ID"
There is a X-ID
I am not sure, if my email was sent this morning. I received no replies, so
there is a good chance that it did not make it's way into the mailing list.
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Explanation of Spam-Report
Date: Thursday 12 July 2007 09:48
From: Bernd Klein &l
r extended ID mean? What's wrong
with an email with "x-id"?
Besides they triggered "TVD_SPACE_RATIO BODY"? What does this mean?
Is there a place, where I can find detailled info about the X-Spam-Report?
Thanks for you help!
Bernd
http://www.bklein.de
Hi
I'm try to change the message in to Spam-Report message.
In to the mail detected like a spam I found the follow header.
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system
"srv-relay.arthis.it", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The o
Duane Hill wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Steven Stern wrote:
>
>> In our standard spam report, we have a line like
>>
>> report For more info, see http://our.server/infopage.html
>>
>> I'm adding content to the page and would like to add links to local
&
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Steven Stern wrote:
In our standard spam report, we have a line like
report For more info, see http://our.server/infopage.html
I'm adding content to the page and would like to add links to local anchors
report For more info, see http://our.server/infopage.html#ancho
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Steven Stern wrote:
> It appears that SA treats the # as the start of a comment and leaves
> "#anchor" out of the resulting report. Is there a way to escape the #?
Try a single backslash:
.../blahblahblah\#anchor
--
John Hardin KA7OHZICQ#15735746http://www.impsec.
In our standard spam report, we have a line like
report For more info, see http://our.server/infopage.html
I'm adding content to the page and would like to add links to local anchors
report For more info, see http://our.server/infopage.html#anchor
It appears that SA treats the # as the
Alejandro Lengua wrote:
Horde webmail has a spam reporting feature, however it
is a bit useless.
Why?
Because it sends the email (without headers) to an email
address (the spam admin). This way is very difficult to
feed the spam mail into spam detection software.
I wonder if somebody has done a
> I wonder if somebody has done anything to make it work
> with the SA-Learn feature of Spam Assassin.
in squirrelmail there is http://www.squirrelmail.org/plugin_view.php?id=242
with is very usefull
1 - 100 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
