Re: spamasssassin vs mimedefang scores
On 22 Feb 2018, at 4:15, saqariden wrote: Hello guys, i'm using mimedefang with spamassasin, when I test an email with the command "spamassain -t file.eml", I got results like this: Dails de l'analyse du message: (-5.8 points, 3.0 requis) -5.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, high trust [70.38.112.54 listed in list.dnswl.org] -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: L'algorithme Bayien a alula probabilitde spam entre 0 et 1% [score: 0.] 0.8 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS 0.3 TO_EQ_FM_DOM_SPF_FAIL To domain == From domain and external SPF failed However, the SA check which was done trough mimedefang, seems like giving other scores, how can i test an email to get these scores, and saw the difference. Typically mimedefang runs as its own special user (e.g. 'defang') which may be configured to block normal interactive use or even simple 'su' use by root. This means that if you run 'spamassassin -t' in an interactive shell, you use the user_prefs, AWL/TxRep and BayesDB for the user running that shell, not the special user. This is particularly problematic for 'learning' ham and spam for the BayesDB, because it is easy to end up either training into a DB that is entirely separate from the system-wide one used by mimedefang OR working with the system-wide DBs in ways that change ownership of them so that mimedefang can't use them. My solution for this is to use sudo and these shell aliases: satest='sudo -H -u defang spamassassin -t ' lham='sudo -H -u defang sa-learn --ham --progress ' lspam='sudo -H -u defang sa-learn --spam --progress ' blspam='sudo -H -u defang spamassassin --add-to-blacklist ' reportspam='sudo -H -u defang spamassassin -r -t '
Re: spamasssassin vs mimedefang scores
On 2/22/2018 4:15 AM, saqariden wrote: i'm using mimedefang with spamassasin, when I test an email with the command "spamassain -t file.eml", I got results like this: Dails de l'analyse du message: (-5.8 points, 3.0 requis) -5.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, high trust [70.38.112.54 listed in list.dnswl.org] -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: L'algorithme Bayien a alula probabilitde spam entre 0 et 1% [score: 0.] 0.8 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS 0.3 TO_EQ_FM_DOM_SPF_FAIL To domain == From domain and external SPF failed However, the SA check which was done trough mimedefang, seems like giving other scores, how can i test an email to get these scores, and saw the difference. Network tests and Bayesian tests could change in between runs. Unless you ran the tests almost concurrently, this could be normal/expected behavior. I love MD and I don't run it with spamassassin it's space. I use a system call to spamc and interpret the results. That way I'm always using the same configuration for spamassassin and I can spam it onto other servers easily. Regards, KAM
spamasssassin vs mimedefang scores
Hello guys, i'm using mimedefang with spamassasin, when I test an email with the command "spamassain -t file.eml", I got results like this: Dails de l'analyse du message: (-5.8 points, 3.0 requis) -5.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, high trust [70.38.112.54 listed in list.dnswl.org] -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: L'algorithme Bayien a alula probabilitde spam entre 0 et 1% [score: 0.] 0.8 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS 0.3 TO_EQ_FM_DOM_SPF_FAIL To domain == From domain and external SPF failed However, the SA check which was done trough mimedefang, seems like giving other scores, how can i test an email to get these scores, and saw the difference. Signature Academique
