We are using v 9.0.6, we will try with version 9.0.7 within a week (we always wait some time after the release of a new version, just to be sure that most bugs have been repeaired ;-) SA rules are correct I assume, because most of the spam is being tagged correctly? I'll have a look to be 100% sure.
Thanks for the effort, Sven > -----Original Message----- > From: Message Sniffer Community > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Koontz > Sent: zondag 24 september 2006 15:38 > To: Message Sniffer Community > Subject: [sniffer] Re: Mdaemon plugin 'sleeping' > > What version of MDaemon / SA are you running? This has > worked perfectly > for me for quite some time. MDaemon v9.07 has been released and > includes Spam Assassin v3.15 which resolves some SA problems. > > Also, double check your local.cf file in SA to make sure your > SNF rules > are correct, with no tabs or line breaks. > > > Sven De Troch wrote: > > hello, > > > > Nobody has any idea? SA and SNF seems to be configured > correctly since > > most of the spams are being tagged. > > Still have the problem that some spam with > > "X-SortMonster-MessageSniffer-Result: 1-->63" in the header is not > > being scored (+5), see below. > > > > thanks, > > Sven > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > > *From:* Sven De Troch > > *Sent:* vrijdag 22 september 2006 10:20 > > *To:* 'Message Sniffer Community' > > *Subject:* RE: [sniffer] Re: Mdaemon plugin 'sleeping' > > > > ok, I think that your are completely right, it seems that SA is > > not always detecting it. > > In my rules, Bayes = -4,1. > > > > But I have seen lots of email wheren the SNF header was inserted > > (X-SortMonster-MessageSniffer-Result: 52), and where > the +5 score > > for SNF detection has not been taken into account for the final > > scoring by SA. > > > > In your situation I should see something like: > > > > > > html +1 > > bayes -4 > > snf +5 > > ---- > > total +2 > > > > but in the logfiles of the messages, I see sometimes (not always > > and that's the problem) > > > > html +1 > > bayes -4 > > ---- > > total -3 > > --> even if the SNF header is inserted (i.e. > > X-SortMonster-MessageSniffer-Result: 52) > > > > So we narrowed the problem to SA (and not SNF)? > > > > kind regards, > > Sven > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > > *From:* Message Sniffer Community > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Jorge Asch > > *Sent:* vrijdag 22 september 2006 6:06 > > *To:* Message Sniffer Community > > *Subject:* [sniffer] Re: Mdaemon plugin 'sleeping' > > > >> It seems indeed that SNF is always working now > (thanks), that > >> is always > >> inserting a header into the mail, but apparently not always > >> passing the > >> message the message to Mdaemon's SA, since the +5 score is > >> not added to > >> the header: > > > > Well, the funny part here, SNF and SA have no > communication at > > all. SNF just writes an extra header to the message. After > > that, SA parses the message, and should auto-detect it. So > > it's not that SNF is not allways passing the score, > it's that > > SA is not allways detecting it. > > > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=6.1 > >> tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, > >> MESSAGE_SNIFFER autolearn=no version=3.1.3 > >> X-SortMonster-MessageSniffer-Result: 52 > > > > It seems that indeed SA is detecting the SNF score. If you > > check the X-Spam-Status, "MESSAGE_SNIFFER" is part of the > > scoring. > > > > From my default SA rules, BAYES_00 is -4 so this > rule alone is > > substracting 4 points to your score. It could be higher on > > your system if you have bayesian learning enable. > > > > Let asume it's 5 o 6, so you basically end up with > a negative > > number, and you add whatever score HTML_MESSAGE has. Check > > your logs for a more detailed scoring on each message. > > > > -- > > Jorge Asch Revilla > > CONEXION DCR > > www.conexion.co.cr > > 800-CONEXION > > > > > > > > > > ############################################################# > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list <[email protected]>. > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > ############################################################# This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list <[email protected]>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
