Jon Ribbens wrote:
Loren Wilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Taking a look at that and offering my opinions:
Thanks for taking the time to have a look at it. Apart from inline
images though, the other points either don't apply to our emails, or
don't appear to be contributing to the Spam
Loren Wilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Taking a look at that and offering my opinions:
Thanks for taking the time to have a look at it. Apart from inline
images though, the other points either don't apply to our emails, or
don't appear to be contributing to the SpamAssassin score.
> In all hon
From: "Rob Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jon Ribbens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/20/06 03:16PM >>>
Adam Lanier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's why I asked to see a sample message. We could probably give some
pointers on what is triggering SA.
Set your TRUSTED_NETWORKS and that'll help. That's
I have attached a sample message to this email. Note, it's just an
example. This message does not trigger at the 5.0 level, but I know
messages like this are being blocked by some of our customers. It does
get a higher score than I would like it to (i.e. 0.0 ;-) ), and
certainly the rules its trig
>>> Jon Ribbens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/20/06 03:16PM >>>
Adam Lanier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's why I asked to see a sample message. We could probably give some
> pointers on what is triggering SA.
I have attached a sample message to this email. Note, it's just an
example. This message d
On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 06:44:48PM +, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> I did that. The problem that needs fixing is SpamAssassin. It is
> triggering on things that are nothing to do with spam (for example,
> RFC-compliant use of multipart/related).
Your main issue is that spammers are making their mails
Noel Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So why not find which rules are triggered by your message
I already did - see my original post at the start of this thread.
> Can't be too hard, spammers do it all the time.
That's my point - why should I have to behave like a spammer in order
to avoid get
On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 11:38 -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 12/20/06, Jon Ribbens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "John D. Hardin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > ...sign up with a service like Habeas or Bonded Sender and put their
> > > headers in your messages?
> >
> > I suppose we could do. Does a
On 12/20/06, Jon Ribbens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"John D. Hardin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...sign up with a service like Habeas or Bonded Sender and put their
> headers in your messages?
I suppose we could do. Does anyone know how much that costs?
It still seems wrong to me though that
"John D. Hardin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...sign up with a service like Habeas or Bonded Sender and put their
> headers in your messages?
I suppose we could do. Does anyone know how much that costs?
It still seems wrong to me though that SpamAssassin is penalising mail
that doesn't look like
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, Kelson wrote:
> John D. Hardin wrote:
> > Do they still subtract points from the score? That's the relevant
> > factor.
>
> The headers? No. Unless you're running a really old SpamAssassin.
No, the fact that the sender has registered with either Habeas or
Bonded Sender.
John D. Hardin wrote:
Do they still subtract points from the score? That's the relevant
factor.
The headers? No. Unless you're running a really old SpamAssassin.
--
Kelson Vibber
SpeedGate Communications
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 10:46:22AM -0800, John D. Hardin wrote:
> Do they still subtract points from the score? That's the relevant
> factor.
Yes, they do. Just sharing that it doesn't involve modifying the message
anymore. :)
--
Randomly Selected Tagline:
"Hey, you know what'd cheer you up? Y
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 09:59:40AM -0800, John D. Hardin wrote:
> > ...sign up with a service like Habeas or Bonded Sender and put their
> > headers in your messages?
>
> FWIW, neither of those put headers in the message (Habeas stopped
> doing that y
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 09:59:40AM -0800, John D. Hardin wrote:
> ...sign up with a service like Habeas or Bonded Sender and put their
> headers in your messages?
FWIW, neither of those put headers in the message (Habeas stopped doing that
years ago). They're both DNS reputation services.
--
Ra
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> I work at a company with an automated on-line system. This system
> sends emails to people. Spam Assassin appears to be triggering
> very strongly, and incorrectly, on our messages.
> Any advice would be gratefully received!
...sign up with a service lik
On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 16:58 +, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>
> But that's all a bit philosophical and beside the point of my
> question, which is: should I change our emails, and if so, in what
> way - or do SpamAssassin's default settings as provided on
> updates.spamassassin.org need changing?
Perha
Sietse van Zanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you have your trusted_networks, internal_networks and all_trusted set
> up correctly?
>
> With these three options you should be able to exclude messages sent
> from your IP address.
Yes, the problem is not that *our* SpamAssassin installation is
f
e resources too.
-Sietse
-Original Message-
From: Jon Ribbens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 5:10 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: What to do about False Positives on messages I am sending?
I work at a company with an automated on-line system. Th
I work at a company with an automated on-line system. This system
sends emails to people. Spam Assassin appears to be triggering very
strongly, and incorrectly, on our messages.
FWIW, no we are not spammers, in fact the emails I'm talking about
aren't even a mailing list. They're emails generated
20 matches
Mail list logo
