- "Jonas Eckerman" schrieb:
>
> Are you sure it forgot to do the tests, or is it just that there
> sometimes are no hits from DNSL tests that should have hit?
>
> If the latter, this might indicate that your DNS is sometimes
> overloaded
> or slow for some other reason, and what you are
- "Matus UHLAR - fantomas" schrieb:
>
> Are you sure you did not disable (or, did enable) network checks? Some
> of
> them have to be enabled, some need additional software installed
> (razor,
> pyzor, dcc)...
>
yes. I'm sure. As I wrote in my original posting on most of the emails the
> - "Matus UHLAR - fantomas" schrieb:
> > you apre probable one of "early recipients" in such cases - the spam
> > started spreading, IP was not listed in blacklists, checksums weren't in
> > *ZOR or DCC databases. I'm afraid only BAYES and other rules may catch
> > that...
On 23.05.09 12:44,
- "Matus UHLAR - fantomas" schrieb:
>
> you apre probable one of "early recipients" in such cases - the spam
> started
> spreading, IP was not listed in blacklists, checksums weren't in *ZOR
> or DCC
> databases. I'm afraid only BAYES and other rules may catch that...
>
thnx for your ans
On 22.05.09 16:59, peter pilsl wrote:
> But occassionally spam comes through where it seems that spamassassin just
> "forgot" to do all the network-checks (spamcop, sorbs, dcc, razor2) and
> therefore the score is low and the mail gets through.
>
> When I run spamassassin on the same mail later it
My spamassassin-setup works quite fine. I've spamassassin invoked as milter
(using the perl-module Mail::SpamAssassin in the milter)
But occassionally spam comes through where it seems that spamassassin just
"forgot" to do all the network-checks (spamcop, sorbs, dcc, razor2) and
therefore the
