William R Ward writes: >I'm not asking for a global whitelist entry. I'm saying that the >e-mail didn't have any spammish headers, and the body of the >message seems like an innocuous announcement to me. > >I think the problem might be because "cash" and "rich" are in the >body. That in itself doesn't mean it's spam. Can we tone down the >rule that is triggered by those words?
Hmm, looks like I was wrong. It does apparently have spammish headers. I don't know anything about osirusoft.com, but spamassassin says it's a spammer. SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ---------------------- SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. SPAM: SPAM: Content analysis details: (6.2 hits, 5 required) SPAM: Hit! (1.2 points) From: does not include a real name SPAM: Hit! (2 points) Received via a relay in relays.osirusoft.com SPAM: [RBL check: found 30.14.181.204.relays.osirusoft.com., type: 127.0.0.4] SPAM: Hit! (3 points) DNSBL: sender is Confirmed Spam Source SPAM: SPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results --------------------- What does "confirmed spam source" mean in this context? Or to put it another way, what does "sender" mean here? The article has no "Sender:" header, and "From:" is <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> which is not listed in any file in /usr/local/share/spamassassin. If osirusoft.com is a spam relay, then what should I say to the Rich Dad people to convince them to not use it? --Bill. -- William R Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wards.net/~bill/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate. _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
