acks a few training messages to become useful:
[8295] dbg: bayes: not available for scanning, only 185 ham(s) in bayes DB< 200
Yes, it is another problem we are trying to fix.
Otherwise it all looks fine. Your sample message really does not hit
much, so an occasional tests=[none] does no
n occasional tests=[none] does not necessarily mean that
something is wrong. You may consider upgrading SA to 3.3.
Mark
ing: 0.224 . A:sns-pb.isc.org.
[8295] dbg: rules: running head tests; score so far=0
[8295] dbg: rules: compiled head tests
[8295] dbg: rules: running body tests; score so far=0
[8295] dbg: rules: compiled body tests
[8295] dbg: rules: running uri tests; score so far=0
[8295] dbg: rules: co
Angel,
> >> Since a time, I'm observing that I have a lot of messages with:
> > have you tried a debug?
> > spamassassin -t -D < spam-message
> Now I've done. This is an example for a message:
> Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required)
> pts rule name description
> --
El 25/11/10 12:48, Tom Kinghorn escribió:
On 2010/11/25 01:10 PM, Angel L. Mateo wrote:
Hello,
We are running spamassassin (with postfix and amavisd-new) for a long
time.
Since a time, I'm observing that I have a lot of messages with:
have you tried a debug?
spamassassin -t -D < spam-mess
On 2010/11/25 01:10 PM, Angel L. Mateo wrote:
Hello,
We are running spamassassin (with postfix and amavisd-new) for a
long time.
Since a time, I'm observing that I have a lot of messages with:
have you tried a debug?
spamassassin -t -D < spam-message
will produce a report similar
Hello,
We are running spamassassin (with postfix and amavisd-new) for a long
time.
Since a time, I'm observing that I have a lot of messages with:
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-4 required=5 tests=[none]
th
At 09:36 AM 7/14/2007, Chris wrote:
I realize they're not using the same tests or plug-ins as I am, i=
t=20
just doesn't make sense to me that an ISP could run all possible tests and=
=20
have none of them hit.
I just removed the max limit to scan messages from Amasd-new because
I came in toda
On Saturday 14 July 2007 10:48 am, SM wrote:
> >Yet their markup shows:
> > > X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
> > > Old-X-Spam-Score: 0
> > > Old-X-Spam-Level:
> > > Old-X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-10 required=6
> > > tests=[none
autolearn=disabled version=3.2.1
> X-Spam-Spammy: Tokens 33
> X-Spam-Pyzor: Reported 677 times.
> X-Spam-DCC: cpollock 104; Body=many Fuz1=many Fuz2=many
Yet their markup shows:
> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
> Old-X-Spam-Score: 0
> Old-X-Spam-Level:
> Old-X-Spam-Status
times.
> X-Spam-DCC: cpollock 104; Body=many Fuz1=many Fuz2=many
Yet their markup shows:
> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
> Old-X-Spam-Score: 0
> Old-X-Spam-Level:
> Old-X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-10 required=6 tests=[none]
Their explaination for this is:
news <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 10/25/2006 08:36:11 AM:
> Thanks Chris I'll do that.. can someone please remind me where I set the
> max_child limit?? Like I said I could not find it last night I want to
see
> what it is set to now and adjust accordingly.
>
It's the -m parameter you specif
> I
>>>> add scores and rules..
>>>>
>>>> So tell me.. how in the past week or so I have 11 mails in *my* box
>>>> that
>>>> show:
>>>>
>>>> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=4.5 tests=none
>>>>
>&g
cores to mark stuff higher.. I have
>>> reasonable
>>> limits set.. the users do not adjust tings here, I do.. I use lint when
>>> I
>>> add scores and rules..
>>>
>>> So tell me.. how in the past week or so I have 11 mails in *my* box that
>>&g
> -Original Message-
> From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Debbie D
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 10:50 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: score=0.0 tests=none -- how can that be???
>
>
> I'm just not getting it.. I have a
>> Exim 4.52 with SA and ClamAV I use spamc
>>
>Oh, one other condition that can cause a "tests=none".. if the size of
>the message is greater than the -s parameter to spamc.. (default 250k )
Well that theory definitely does not hold water in this case :) the paypa
res to mark stuff higher.. I have
>>> reasonable
>>> limits set.. the users do not adjust tings here, I do.. I use lint when
>>> I
>>> add scores and rules..
>>>
>>> So tell me.. how in the past week or so I have 11 mails in *my* box that
>>
;> limits set.. the users do not adjust tings here, I do.. I use lint when
>> I
>> add scores and rules..
>>
>> So tell me.. how in the past week or so I have 11 mails in *my* box that
>> show:
>>
>> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=4.5 tests=none
>
So tell me.. how in the past week or so I have 11 mails in *my* box that
> show:
>
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=4.5 tests=none
>
Usually that means a timeout, or your milter was configured to skip SA
for the message.
How do you call SA? mimedefang? spamc call in procmail.rc?
ve 11 mails in *my* box that
show:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=4.5 tests=none
Of these 3 are very valid mails, one from a user on my system but sent thru
the companies DSL connection and should have caught something.. AWL or
something. The second valid mail is a payment from paypal..
lt; 256001
| /usr/local/bin/spamc -f -u $LOGNAME
I haven't seen a 'tests=none' since doing those two things. I'm not sure
which one helped. I suspect it's a combination of both. The real culprit,
however, is most likely a SLOW SERVER. Yes, mine is very (relatively)
slow.
Hallo und Guten Abend Theo,
Heute (am 27.09.2005 - 18:04 Uhr)
schriebst Du:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 05:45:04PM +0200, Jim Knuth wrote:
>> The headers shown the follow
>>
>> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-9999.9 required=4 tests=[none]
>> X-Spam-
On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 05:45:04PM +0200, Jim Knuth wrote:
> The headers shown the follow
>
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-.9 required=4 tests=[none]
> X-Spam-Score: 0
>
> Or should I arrange the question of the amavis list?
It depends, is that every message
Hallo und Guten Tag spamassassin-users,
I have a new server with Debian 3.1 and SA 3.1.0 and amavisd-new
2.3.3. I am surprised, why no checks is done.
The headers shown the follow
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-.9 required=4 tests=[none]
X-Spam-Score: 0
Or should I arrange the
24 matches
Mail list logo
