On 28 April 2015 at 12:25, Martin Hepworth <max...@gmail.com> wrote: > that score does look very low, especially for those rules that fired, even > with the BAYES_00.
Yup, that is what I thought, all the spam levels seem very low in my messages. *** Final Notice *** This notice is to inform you your factory warranty has expired, you are now responsible for paying any repairs. Please respond by 23Apr15 and mention this notice for a 60% discount. This got X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 > > I'd look to make sure you're adding the scores for the rules in the headers > as well as the rules that fired so you see if you've got another rule score > with a big negative number > > > -- > Martin Hepworth, CISSP > Oxford, UK > > On 28 April 2015 at 12:18, RW <rwmailli...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 12:10:15 +0100 >> Benjamin Copeland wrote: >> >> > On 28 April 2015 at 12:01, Christian Laußat >> > <spamassas...@list.laussat.de> wrote: >> > > Am 28.04.2015 12:52, schrieb Benjamin Copeland: >> > >> >> > >> Any suggestions on how I can improve this? >> > > >> > > >> > > Which user are you running the script as? Is it the same user as >> > > your mailserver is invoking spamassassin? >> > >> > I manually run it, I run it as sudo root. >> >> It should be whatever spamd is running as, or drops to. It shouldn't >> be root. >> >> > The script chown's the mbox, that being said I have now added the -u >> > option in. >> >> Don't do that unless you have multiple virtual users configured and >> genuinely need it. > >
