Re: problems with redirected mail
I assume that I scan all mail automatically (obviously there might be some setup errors). Still I don't know why some redirected e-mails get through when others not, even if both are scored as spam on my local server. Thank's Wojtek Magnus Holmgren wrote: On Monday 30 October 2006 21:41, Wojciech Potrzebowski took the opportunity to say: I understand that there are different configurations of two servers but I am wondering if there is any possibility to catch these mail (not treated as spam with remote server) on my local server. Well, certainly. Why not just ignore the result from the remote server and run SpamAssassin yourself, as you've apparently managed to do? Do you need help setting SA up so that all mail is scanned automatically? What you *shouldn't* do is to reject mail forwarded by the remote server, because then it will start sending bounces to innocent people whose addresses where forged as senders of the spam.
Re: problems with redirected mail
On Monday 30 October 2006 21:41, Wojciech Potrzebowski took the opportunity to say: > I understand that there are different configurations of two servers but > I am wondering if there is any possibility to catch these mail (not > treated as spam with remote server) on my local server. Well, certainly. Why not just ignore the result from the remote server and run SpamAssassin yourself, as you've apparently managed to do? Do you need help setting SA up so that all mail is scanned automatically? What you *shouldn't* do is to reject mail forwarded by the remote server, because then it will start sending bounces to innocent people whose addresses where forged as senders of the spam. -- Magnus Holmgren[EMAIL PROTECTED] (No Cc of list mail needed, thanks) pgp9pqDgmiG2B.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: problems with redirected mail
I understand that there are different configurations of two servers but I am wondering if there is any possibility to catch these mail (not treated as spam with remote server) on my local server. Thank's Wojtek Magnus Holmgren wrote: On Monday 30 October 2006 20:44, Wojciech Potrzebowski took the opportunity to say: Thank you for your time in handling with this case! I have atached two e-mails with headers from both servers. I can only configure SA on my local server: iwonka.med.virginia.edu. I don't have access to the other mail server. As you can see, on your local server the spam hits BAYES_99: X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_99,NO_RECEIVED, NO_RELAYS,TO_WM_FROM_COM autolearn=no version=3.0.6 But on the other server bayesian-style (it's not pure bayesian, but modified to be better) classifying isn't used at all, or isn't trained (they're using Amavisd-new as the interface to SA, which (in a way) explains the slightly different header format. In any case, you won't get the same results unless both servers share the same bayes database.
Re: problems with redirected mail
On Monday 30 October 2006 20:44, Wojciech Potrzebowski took the opportunity to say: > Thank you for your time in handling with this case! > I have atached two e-mails with headers from both servers. I can only > configure SA on my local server: iwonka.med.virginia.edu. I don't have > access to the other mail server. As you can see, on your local server the spam hits BAYES_99: > X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_99,NO_RECEIVED, > NO_RELAYS,TO_WM_FROM_COM autolearn=no version=3.0.6 But on the other server bayesian-style (it's not pure bayesian, but modified to be better) classifying isn't used at all, or isn't trained (they're using Amavisd-new as the interface to SA, which (in a way) explains the slightly different header format. In any case, you won't get the same results unless both servers share the same bayes database. -- Magnus Holmgren[EMAIL PROTECTED] (No Cc of list mail needed, thanks) pgpsV8RYWvryj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: problems with redirected mail
Thank you for your time in handling with this case! I have atached two e-mails with headers from both servers. I can only configure SA on my local server: iwonka.med.virginia.edu. I don't have access to the other mail server. Best regards, Wojtek --- Begin Message --- Received: from localhost by iwonka.med.virginia.edu with SpamAssassin (version 3.0.6); Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:46:26 -0400 From: "Investors.com briefcase" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Growth alert that brings profit, look through the email Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 10:39:31 +0700 X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.6 (2005-12-07) on iwonka.med.virginia.edu X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_99,NO_RECEIVED, NO_RELAYS,TO_WM_FROM_COM autolearn=no version=3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--=_45421BC2.7E55E961" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. =_45421BC2.7E55E961 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Spam detection software, running on the system "iwonka.med.virginia.edu", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Paul Robinson, whose World Cup was a mixed bag. They have now won the competition four times, one fewer than Brazil, and it was theAmbassador Bolton: "The Security Council upheld its responsibility and passed a [...] Content analysis details: (5.5 points, 4.0 required) pts rule name description -- -- 2.0 TO_WM_FROM_COM To [EMAIL PROTECTED] from a .com -0.0 NO_RELAYS Informational: message was not relayed via SMTP 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% [score: 0.] -0.0 NO_RECEIVEDInformational: message has no Received headers =_45421BC2.7E55E961 Content-Type: message/rfc822; x-spam-type=original Content-Description: original message before SpamAssassin Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: "Investors.com briefcase" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Growth alert that brings profit, look through the email Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 10:39:31 +0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-UVA-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at fork9.mail.virginia.edu X-Sender-IP: 222.253.216.151 X-UVa-Vac-OK: 1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 tagged_above=1.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08, HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_HTML_ONLY X-Spam-Level: x Paul Robinson, whose World Cup was a mixed bag. They have now won the competition four times, one fewer than Brazil, and it was theAmbassador Bolton: "The Security Council upheld its responsibility and passed a "The essence of the game is goals. If it's an open game, there is enough room for 11Explanation of tournament rules and regulations but England's appeals came to nothing. embroiled in a corruption scandal similar to 1982 when they last won the World Cup.the back for England in a tense first half.Figo's headbutt on Mark van Bommel, Philippe Senderos being covered in blood after Dare McClaren drop Lampard to accommodate Hargreaves and Gerrard? =_45421BC2.7E55E961-- --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: "Investors.com briefcase" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Growth alert that brings profit, look through the email Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 10:39:31 +0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-UVA-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at fork9.mail.virginia.edu X-Sender-IP: 222.253.216.151 X-UVa-Vac-OK: 1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 tagged_above=1.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08, HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_HTML_ONLY X-Spam-Level: x Paul Robinson, whose World Cup was a mixed bag. They have now won the competition four times, one fewer than Brazil, and it was theAmbassador Bolton: "The Security Council upheld its responsibility and passed a "The essence of the game is goals. If it's an open game, there is enough room for 11Explanation of tournament rules and regulations but England's appeals came to nothing. embroiled in a corruption scandal similar to 1982 when they last won the World Cup.the back for England in a tense first half.Figo's headbutt on Mark van Bommel, Philippe Senderos being covered in blood after Dare McClaren drop Lampard to accommodate Hargreaves and Gerrard? --- End Message ---
Re: problems with redirected mail
On Monday 30 October 2006 06:07, Wojciech Potrzebowski took the opportunity to say: > I am running spamassassin with qmail. It catchs up most of mail that is > scored as spam. However, some e-mails that are redirected form the other > mail server (also with spam checking system) get through even it is > treates spam if I run local test. Any idea how to fix the problem? Please provide one or more examples, with the SA headers from both servers, of mail that got through the other server but was classified as spam on the local server. There are a couple of ways the scores can differ if the systems don't exchange information. -- Magnus Holmgren[EMAIL PROTECTED] (No Cc of list mail needed, thanks) pgptcwaxCvv4l.pgp Description: PGP signature
problems with redirected mail
I am running spamassassin with qmail. It catchs up most of mail that is scored as spam. However, some e-mails that are redirected form the other mail server (also with spam checking system) get through even it is treates spam if I run local test. Any idea how to fix the problem? Wojtek