On January 13, 2004 03:27 am, Teun Vink wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 17:12, Konstantin Kletschke wrote:
> > Hi there!
> >
> > I have a difficult Problem since I donÄt know where the difference
> > comes from:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ spamc -c < spam4
> > 4.6/6.5
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ spamassassin -t < spam4
> > ...
> > Content analysis details:   (10.1 points, 6.5 required)
> >
> >  pts rule name              description
> > ---- ----------------------
> > -------------------------------------------------- 3.8 HTML_MESSAGE      
> >     BODY: HTML included in message
> >  2.6 BAYES_99               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100%
> >                             [score: 1.0000]
> >  5.0 MIME_HTML_ONLY         BODY: Message only has text/html MIME parts
> >  0.1 BIZ_TLD                URI: Contains a URL in the BIZ top-level
> > domain -8.0 HABEAS_SWE             Has Habeas warrant mark
> > (http://www.habeas.com/) 1.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS_HTTP     RBL: SORBS: sender is
> > open HTTP proxy server [24.29.65.166 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.7
> > RCVD_IN_DSBL           RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org
> > [<http://dsbl.org/listing?ip=24.29.65.166>] 3.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET
> > RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net [Blocked - see
> > <http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?24.29.65.166>] 0.5 RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY  
> >  RBL: NJABL: sender is an open proxy
> >                             [24.29.65.166 listed in dnsbl.njabl.org]
> >  0.1 RCVD_IN_NJABL          RBL: Received via a relay in dnsbl.njabl.org
> >                             [24.29.65.166 listed in dnsbl.njabl.org]
> >  0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS          RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS
> >                             [24.29.65.166 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
> >  1.1 MIME_HTML_ONLY_MULTI   Multipart message only has text/html MIME
> >  parts
>
> Do the math:
>
> 10.1 - 1.1 (RCVD_IN_SORBS_HTTP) - 0.7 (RCVD_IN_DSBL) - 3.0
> (RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET) - 0.5 (RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY) - 0.1 (RCVD_IN_NJABL)
> - 0.1 (RCVD_IN_SORBS) == 4.6
>
> So obviously, spamc only does local tests.

I use spamc/spamd and network tests ARE ran.  What I noticed is that when you 
call spamc or spamassassin to analyze a piece of mail twice, you won't always 
get the same hits.  I'm not sure why, sometimes the networks tests are not 
ran, sometimes part of the local tests are not ran.

Pedro

-- 
Coward, n.:
        One who in a perilous emergency thinks with his legs.
                -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software.
Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System offering
advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes on 50+ platforms.
Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Reply via email to