Re: Spamassassin behavior

2006-03-01 Thread Matt Kettler
Alan Au wrote: > Hi Mr. Matt, > > Thanks a lot for replying me. I have some thing to clarify. Please see > below : > > We forward a wrongly classifed email as attachement (RFC822) . Will it > be OK for SpamAssassin to learn? If you strip the attachment and feed that to SA, yes. If you feed the

Re: Spamassassin behavior

2006-03-01 Thread jdow
Maybe. If the ENTIRE email is attached, all header lines and all body lines, in a format that can be easily extracted then "yes" is a possibility. You will probably have to write the automatic extraction tool to get the attachment out of the forwarded email and feed it to salearn. {^_^} - Ori

Re: Spamassassin behavior

2006-02-28 Thread Alan Au
Hi Mr. Matt,   Thanks a lot for replying me. I have some thing to clarify. Please see below :   We forward a wrongly classifed email as attachement (RFC822) . Will it be OK for SpamAssassin to learn?   Regards,   Alan Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Alan Au wrote:> Hi all,> > In

Re: Spamassassin behavior

2006-02-28 Thread Matt Kettler
Alan Au wrote: > Hi all, > > In : > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BayesInSpamAssassin, it is stated > that : > > It's OK to feed emails with Spamassassin markup into the sa-learn > command -- sa-learn will ignore any standard Spamassassin headers, and > if the original email has been enca

Spamassassin behavior

2006-02-28 Thread Alan Au
Hi all,   In : http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BayesInSpamAssassin, it is stated that :   It's OK to feed emails with Spamassassin markup into the sa-learn command -- sa-learn will ignore any standard Spamassassin headers, and if the original email has been encapsulated into an attachment

Re: User Blacklist Spamassassin Behavior

2005-06-29 Thread Tim Jackson
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:38:39 -0600 "Paul R. Ganci" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alan Premselaar wrote: > > >> perhaps all I am really asking is if there is a way to allow > >> spamassassin to just stop processing a message that is in a > >> blacklist to save the cycles? I am not asking for spama

Re: User Blacklist Spamassassin Behavior

2005-06-28 Thread Matt Kettler
Paul R. Ganci wrote: > This is somewhat a philosophical question, but I will ask it anyways. > Recent discussions have occurred on this list regarding what > Spamassassin should do with Spam. The recent consensus seems to be that > it is only Spamassassin's job to tag Spam and that some other progr

Re: User Blacklist Spamassassin Behavior

2005-06-28 Thread Kai Schaetzl
Paul R. Ganci wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005 23:34:22 -0600: > However, I don't > necessarily agree with the above because while I can add a procmail rule > to handle a specific user's blacklist I can't get back the wasted CPU > cycles which spamassassin expended But that's up to *your* setup. If y

RE: User Blacklist Spamassassin Behavior

2005-06-28 Thread Chris Santerre
> Why is it not a good idea for Spamassassin to immediately >send to /dev/null a message flagged in somebody's blacklist ASAP ... >i.e. no further processing? Is the only way to handle this via a >procmail recipe? Similar what about a whitelist ... shouldn't >it be sent >on as Ham ASAP ... i.e

Re: User Blacklist Spamassassin Behavior

2005-06-27 Thread Paul R. Ganci
Alan Premselaar wrote: perhaps all I am really asking is if there is a way to allow spamassassin to just stop processing a message that is in a blacklist to save the cycles? I am not asking for spamassassin to become an MTA/MDA. In that case it would be ultimately more efficient to add a rej

Re: User Blacklist Spamassassin Behavior

2005-06-27 Thread Alan Premselaar
Paul R. Ganci wrote: Alan Premselaar wrote: Philosophically, it makes more sense for SpamAssassin to focus on identifying SPAM, and let another application (MTA, procmail, etc) focus on what it was primarily designed for: processing (delivery,rejection,etc) of said email. It's certainly no m

Re: User Blacklist Spamassassin Behavior

2005-06-27 Thread Paul R. Ganci
Alan Premselaar wrote: Philosophically, it makes more sense for SpamAssassin to focus on identifying SPAM, and let another application (MTA, procmail, etc) focus on what it was primarily designed for: processing (delivery,rejection,etc) of said email. It's certainly no more of a hassle to ad

Re: User Blacklist Spamassassin Behavior

2005-06-27 Thread Alan Premselaar
Paul R. Ganci wrote: This is somewhat a philosophical question, but I will ask it anyways. Recent discussions have occurred on this list regarding what Spamassassin should do with Spam. The recent consensus seems to be that it is only Spamassassin's job to tag Spam and that some other program

User Blacklist Spamassassin Behavior

2005-06-27 Thread Paul R. Ganci
This is somewhat a philosophical question, but I will ask it anyways. Recent discussions have occurred on this list regarding what Spamassassin should do with Spam. The recent consensus seems to be that it is only Spamassassin's job to tag Spam and that some other program should decide what to