On 10/11/2012 10:01 AM, Mike Tirpak wrote:
On 10/11/2012 12:34 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
On 10/11/2012 09:08 AM, Mike Tirpak wrote:
On 10/11/2012 11:30 AM, Eric Shubert wrote:
On 10/11/2012 08:14 AM, Digital Instruments wrote:
Does It really stayed without an answer?
On 04/10/2012 14:19, Mike Tirpak wrote:
I upgraded clamav a couple of days ago and everything went fine.
Clamav would catch everything with a virus attached inside a zip
file. Over the past two days, I've gotten two emails that have zip
files with viruses inside them. Is there a tweek I should do with
the
new version of clam?
Another strange issue is spamassassin is marking mail as spam when it
should not be. An example is I have received emails from a person
last week that was not spam and it went through just fine. Today, the
same type of email from the same person got marked as spam. I know
that there are a lot of ways to configure spamassassin. What can I do
to prevent this from happening?
Thanks,
Mike
Does it take half a year to follow up? ;)
If this is (still) a problem, please start a new thread!
Yes, this is still a problem. No one replied, so I'm hoping I stumble
on the answer on some forums.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Which versions?
# rpm -qa | grep toaster | sort
Are your virus definitions up to date?
Does clamav detect the virus if you run against the zip file manually?
How large are the attachments? I know that large files may not be
scanned for some things.
For the spam question, please post headers from the message in
question. That will indicate which rules fired giving it a high score.
qmailtoaster is up to date with the latest versions and the definitions
are current too. The attachments are fairly small. The one I got today
was 32KB. I haven't tried to scan it manually yet. I pop them off the
server with thunderbird. I'll start checking the account through
squirrel and scan one when they come in.
Spamassassin seems to be marking a lot of them as BAYES_99. I think the
bayes_rules are getting conflicted. What are good settings for the
bayes rules in local.cf?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's what I use:
score BAYES_00 0 0 -2.612 -2.899
score BAYES_05 0 0 -1.110 -1.110
score BAYES_20 0 0 -0.740 -0.740
score BAYES_40 0 0 -0.185 -0.185
score BAYES_50 0 0 0.001 0.001
score BAYES_60 0 0 1.5 1.5
score BAYES_80 0 0 3.0 3.0
score BAYES_95 0 0 4.0 4.0
score BAYES_99 0 0 5.1 5.1
This weighs bayes a little heavier though than the defaults IIRC.
How are you training bayes? You might want to feed the FPs into sa-learn
with the learn-ham option, or perhaps start over with a fresh (empty)
bayes database.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-unsubscr...@qmailtoaster.com
For additional commands, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-h...@qmailtoaster.com
