-Original Message-
From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 January 2005 01:07
To: Jeff Chan
Cc: Darren Coleman; Jack L. Stone; Loren Wilton;
users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lots of spam being missed with SA 3.0.2 + lots of
RulesEmp
rules
On Wednesday
Hi,
I'm running the latest version of SpamAssassin (3.0.2), with a healthy
Bayes database (I believe) and pretty much all of the available rules
from rulesemporium.com and I have noticed recently, particularly from
comments from my users, that SA is missing a lot of clear spasm.
I have attached
: [SPAM-TAG] Lots of spam being missed with SA 3.0.2 + lots
of
RulesEmp rules
On Wednesday, January 12, 2005, 3:20:17 AM, Darren Coleman wrote:
Hi,
I'm running the latest version of SpamAssassin (3.0.2), with a
healthy
Bayes database (I believe) and pretty much all of the available
rules
Hi Loren,
Firstly, thanks for your help.
I have searched around rulesemporium without much success trying to find
these LOCAL_OBFU_* rules. I don't suppose you could tell me the
filename that they occur in could you? (I assume they will be in
/etc/mail/Spamassassin or wherever your local.cf
Hmm..
I got the following on that message (having reconfigured SURBL):
Content analysis details: (8.0 points, 5.0 required)
0.3 RM_hm_EmtyMsgidMessage ID is empty, or just spaces -
probable spamsign
0.3 SARE_WEOFFER BODY: Offers Something
2.5 MANGLED_CIALIS BODY:
-Original Message-
From: Darren Coleman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12 January 2005 15:29
To: Jack L. Stone; Loren Wilton; users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Lots of spam being missed with SA 3.0.2 + lots of
RulesEmp
rules
Hmm..
I got the following on that message
Is the last line meant as some kind of threat? :)
I'm sorry to say but you must have some sort of configuration issue with
your install, and I'd suggest to RTFM. I upgraded from 2.64 to 3.00 and
have recently less untagged spam (as expected) as a result.
- Are you using any additional rulesets
