Note that #1 would have acted the way naïve users (nothing personal, Bob) expect it
to, if the SA developers accept
<http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2607>. Others
<http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2659>
<http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2498> will continue to get confused
by this until it's fixed.
- dan
--
Dan Kohn <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://www.dankohn.com/> <tel:+1-650-327-2600>
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 14:56
To: Bob Rosenberg; Spamassassin mailing list
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Looking for Rules
At 04:36 PM 11/10/2003, Bob Rosenberg wrote:
>I have a number of gripes about this.
>
> 1) I only get 5 points not 5.1 when I add them together.
One word.. rounding.. The report only displays the rule score down to the
nearest tenth of a point, however the rules are scored down further in
precision.
The real, unrounded, scores are:
0.53 RCVD_IN_NJABL_DIALUP
0.100 RCVD_IN_NJABL
2.55 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK
1.91 FORGED_MUA_EUDORA
-----
5.09
And 5.09 rounds to 5.1
> 2) I am getting penalized multiple times for the same "offence" - ie:
> Using a Cable Connection to send my mail to the CORRECT SMTP Server (ie:
> The designated Server for the ISP whose account my mail is addressed from
> instead of the "Smart Host" of my Cable ISP).
>
>I get both a RCVD_IN_NJABL_DIALUP and a RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK for being a
>Cable User (3 points) and an extra .1 point for sending to my ISP's SMTP
>Server when not using that ISP's Connectivity. I object to this multi
>charging for the same thing. Both of the NJABL rules key off the same
>table and I then get clobbered with 2.5 points for not having a static IP
>Address (after being charged .5 points for being a "Dial-Up" user which as
>a Cable User I AM NOT).
From the perspective of dynablock and NJABL, *any* end-user IP address is
listed.. these list dialups, dsls, cable modems, or whatever, for a
home-user type address that should be sending mail via a mail relay and not
directly sending mail.
In your case, you're being penalized for one of two reasons:
1) the spamassassin box is misconfigured and nobody set their
trusted_networks in a situation that needs it (hint: any box running a
NATed IP address MUST set trusted_networks by hand, autodiscovery does NOT
work)
2) you really are directly injecting mail to a server that runs SA
from your home address, instead of using your ISP's mail relay. If you want
SA to not tag these messages, either get that admin to reconfigure his
trusted_networks, or start using your ISP's SMTP relay.
>I know that there is nothing that I can do about this (except
>Mis-Configure my Mail Client to route all my mail through my CURRENT
>Connectivity provider [and do it again when I alter my connectivity]) even
>though all the mail is going via SMTP AUTH links to PORT587 and thus is
>being Authenticated by the Injection SMTP Host (in MSA Mode due to it
>coming in via Port 587.
>
> 3) My major gripe is with the adding insult-to-injury 1.9 point invalid
> rejection of my X-Mailer Header. I use a Macintosh version of Eudora
> which does NOT have the Hardcoded X-Mailer constant that Spamassassin is
> looking for. In Mac Eudora the X-Mailer Header is created (as are all
> other X-* headers) by the user coding what the data in the header should be.
Aye, unfortunately since there's no standard for X-Mailers for the MAC
version of Eudora, a lot of them look to SA like the windows version. Try
using an X-Mailer header that starts with "Eudora for Macintosh" or "Eudora
for Mac OS X". SA does recognize those strings as MAC versions.. it
currently doesn't recognize the format you're using, so it assumes it must
be a windows version, and then realizes the message was clearly not
generated by Eudora for Windows (which it wasn't but SA is confused and
thinks it is)..
There's a bug open on this issue.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2598
Personally, I'm hoping to spend some time revamping these rules so that MAC
versions of Eudora are never thought to be forged no matter what they read.
Basically this will involve characterizing the message-id's of Eudora for
Mac's and always checking both windows and mac versions of the message-id,
no matter what the x-mailer header reads. It will be better this way in the
long run and will have fewer holes in it for spammers to abuse, or end
users to fall in accidentally.
However, my spare time is limited, so it's possible Justin and friends will
beat me to the punch.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
