On Sun, 25 May 2014 08:59:28 -0700 Ian Zimmerman wrote: > On Sun, 25 May 2014 16:40:44 +0200 > Axb <axb.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Axb> URIBL rules are not set to use 'userconf' (user configuration) > Axb> so entries in user_prefs shouldn't affect the results > > Axb> if anything it should go in a system wide rule (ie: local.cf) > Axb> (not user_prefs) > > Axb> your: tflags URIBL_DBL_SPAM autolearn_force > > Axb> should probably read: > > Axb> tflags URIBL_DBL_SPAM net domains_only autolearn_force > > Axb> etc, etc - and not in user_ > > Axb> iirc, this will also influence Bayes's scoring/learning > Axb> behaviour. modifying rules' tflags should be done with care > > But it does autolearn in _some_ instances: > > May 25 08:33:50 host spamd[13561]: spamd: result: Y 10 - > BAYES_99,BAYES_999,HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST,HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_ONLY, > RDNS_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_REMOTE_IMAGE,URIBL_BLACK,URIBL_DBL_SPAM,URIBL_JP_SURBL > scantime=1.7,size=6496,user=itz,uid=1000,required_score=4.3,rhost=127.0.0.1, > raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=52900, > mid=<24251386609892242521126914206...@lun5bim.dollazo.eu>,bayes=1.000000, > autolearn=spam autolearn_force=yes > (URIBL_JP_SURBL,URIBL_DBL_SPAM,URIBL_BLACK) >
A difference between this and the other one you quoted is that this one appears to be over the 6 point threshold and the other didn't. (I haven't done the exact arithmetic for scoreset 1, but the other was only slightly over 6 in scoreset 3 including BAYES_99, and this one is well over). That would mean that even if autolearn_force worked correctly, it still wouldn't have been autolearned. It would be interesting to see if you can reproduce the previous autolearn_force=no result on a very high scoring spam - It's possible there may be a cosmetic bug where autolearn_force is not logged correctly when the spam isn't going to be autolearned anyway.
