On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 12:00:41PM -0500, Ed Weinberg wrote:
I am surprised that email that just has html with no text does not score
higher. From '85 to 2002 I used an email client (Forte Agent) which did
not render HTML. I make the generalization that any email, with the
exception of
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 04:03:23PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Check this message (scroll down until you see /html tag!)
The copy of this spam that I got scored 7.7 against my filters.
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=7.7 required=5.0
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 12:06:13PM -0500, Rose, Bobby wrote:
I wish we could get more info from Justin or Craig to clear up
everything. Justin's last message did raise some concern with the
remark of There's no closing of the source involved (except for their
own (Deersoft now NAI)
So this spam just sneaked into my inbox with 4.9 points. I hate that, it's
the first one in days.
Looking at it, it turns out that a bunch of bogus Received headers are
fooling Spamassassin into quitting with the DNSBL checks before it gets to
the real meat -- increasing num_check_received to 5
On Sat, Dec 28, 2002 at 02:18:09PM -0600, Mike Loiterman wrote:
Hrm...I'm wondering if sending the permission denied message is an
invitation for them to really lay it on me. In other words, they know
they've hit a valid address, but I'm refusing their crap. Maybe
they'll use my address as
So I'm having some difficulty grasping some stuff about meta rules.
Maybe now that I've got 350 lines of local spamassassin config, it's
time for me to delve into the source and join the devel list or
something, but let's see if I can figure this out.
I suspect my problem is related to the order
On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 06:27:47PM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
Ok, I cleaned up the do_meta code a little bit and added in the
strategic sort. :)
I first tried changing the line
my @tests = keys %{$self-{conf}{meta_tests}};
to just sort the keys, but that explodes badly -- you pretty
On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 11:56:29PM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
So in 2.50 now, naming doesn't matter now for meta meta dependencies;
the code will figure out what order to run the tests in, including
circular dependencies, and do the right thing. :)
Way cool, thanks.
-Jeremy
So I just received an email, and the spamassassin output says:
SPAM: * 0.4 -- RBL: Received via a relay in relays.osirusoft.com
SPAM: [RBL check: found 87.20.89.138.relays.osirusoft.com., type: 127.0.0.3]
SPAM: * 0.6 -- RBL: DNSBL: sender ip address in in a dialup block
SPAM: * 0.4
