John Hardin wrote:
spamassassin --remove-addr-from-whitelist=problemacco...@clientdomain.com
An additional note (since, IIRC, the OP said he did this already):
Make sure to run this for the same user as that wich scans the mail when
it get's the ridicilously high score.
Regards
/Jonas
--
On Thu, 7 May 2009, Jodizzz wrote:
May 7 15:58:56 mail2 spamd[3060]: spamd: checking message
<79bfa64f2c2d4a50b1c00aedbb24f...@pc04> for qscand:511
May 7 15:58:56 mail2 spamd[3060]: spamd: result: Y 667 -
AWL,BAYES_00,DOS_OE_TO_MX,FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,HTML_MESSAGE,USER_IN_WHITELIST
^^^
Yep.
eep guns out of a university?
> -----------
> Tomorrow: the 64th anniversary of VE day
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/The-weirdest-problem-I-have-ever-met-Dear-all%2C--Please-help-me-with-thi
On Thu, 7 May 2009, Jodizzz wrote:
Test 1: I send an email from my user's pc at their LAN (Connecting to their
own ISP) and used "problemacco...@clientdomain.com" to send an email to
myself jodi...@mydomain.com.
Result: Email was labelled as very very high spam. Mail headers as below
Message
Jodizzz wrote:
Result: Email was labelled as very very high spam. Mail headers as below
Unfortunately those headers does not include the actual rules that hit.
Without knowing this, we can only give you educated guesses.
Please include the lists of hits for the message. It should be possibl
0.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
In conclusion the email is only treated as major spam if it is from that
particular user problemacco...@clientdomain.com and via the LAN/ISP
connection.
What seem
t;\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
> main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i c<<=1:
> (c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0;
> }}}
>
>
>
--
View this message i
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 06:52 -0700, John Hardin wrote:
> On Sun, 3 May 2009, Jodizzz wrote:
> > SA:SPAM-DELETE:RC:0(xxx.xx.xxx.xxx):SA:1(1528.3/5.5)
OK, so there's the SA score as reported by qmail. Good. However, that
alone is quite useless -- we need the full, detailed Report of all rules
hit an
>
> - rh
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/The-weirdest-problem-I-have-ever-met-Dear-all%2C--Please-help-me-with-this-very-weird-problem.--I-have-a-client-with-this-user-who%27s-is-suddenly-having-a-problem-sending-out-emails.-When-I-checked-the-logs%2C-t
if people/you are using port 25 for submission, stop that.
since you are using qmail, why dont you just create an login auth only smtpd
service on port 587 for submission and let people hit it to login to relay
emails
make sure that the server does not check and score those emails coming in
auth
itelist.
>
>
> --
> char
> *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
> main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i c<<=1:
> (c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0;
> }
I think usually when renaming it comes up, people just start talking
about the stuff it should or could be doing, and that branches into a
"write a more fully featured plugin" conversation, which then doesn't
go anywhere. :(
The AWL has also been around for so long that renaming it would
probably
Thanks for the replies. All is now clear. Though I would (politely)
request this be clarified in the entries in the docs. Thanks!
- Charles
On Mon, 4 May 2009, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 12:16 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
On Mon, 4 May 2009, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Then there's the AWL, aka the historical score averager, which has
> some commands via "spamassassin" to do simple manipulation, usually to
> correct undesired entries. The score changes per message, typically.
Any movement to rename AWL and thus to avoid explaining it so
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 12:16 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
> On Mon, 4 May 2009, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
The original statement which you snippet is important, since the
question was how to do exactly that -- manipulating the AWL.
Try wiping his AWL entry.
> > > We can do that? What tool wou
You're wrong (but you're close). :)
You can configure your own whitelist_from_* and blacklist_from_* (or
the other whitelist/blacklist commands) in your user_prefs/configs.
Either you have the config or you don't, and the scores are for the
rule not each sender, so in that sense, it's "permanent".
On Mon, 4 May 2009, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
We can do that? What tool would I use?
See the spamassassin options with whitelist in the name, particularly
--remove-addr-from-whitelist.
Okay, maybe I'm misunderstanding. I was under the impression that
spamassassin had TWO 'whitelists'. One wa
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 10:44 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
> On Mon, 4 May 2009, John Hardin wrote:
> > Try wiping his AWL entry.
>
> We can do that? What tool would I use?
man spamassassin-run
See the spamassassin options with whitelist in the name, particularly
--remove-addr-from-whitelist.
On Mon, 4 May 2009, John Hardin wrote:
Try wiping his AWL entry.
We can do that? What tool would I use?
- Charles
On Sun, 3 May 2009, Jodizzz wrote:
...the longest email subject _evar_!
SA:SPAM-DELETE:RC:0(xxx.xx.xxx.xxx):SA:1(1528.3/5.5)
1528 is a ... rather large ... rather large SA score.
Did that user send a GTUBE to someone and AWL is now trying to average
everything he sends up to that score?
T
At 09:55 PM 5/3/2009, you wrote:
Dear all, Please help me with this very weird problem. I have a
client with this user who's is suddenly having a problem sending out
emails. When I checked the logs, the email is stopped by
qmailscanner with a very high spam rating.
SA:SPAM-DELETE:RC:0(xxx.xx.x
-
problem still exists.
Any idea where else I can check? Is there any way to know why anti-spam is
blocking?
Thanks a lot.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Unhappy-The-weirdest-problem-I-have-ever-met-Dear-all%2C--Please-help-me-with-this-very-weird-problem.--I-have-a-client
22 matches
Mail list logo
