Thanks for ur inputs. when i put across SA this is what i get on my pc..
Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 4.5 required)
pts rule name description
---- ----------------------
--------------------------------------------------
1.0 Local_Signup BODY: Body mentions Sign up
0.1 TW_TV BODY: Odd Letter Triples with TV
0.1 TW_VP BODY: Odd Letter Triples with VP
0.1 TW_YD BODY: Odd Letter Triples with YD
0.5 HTML_20_30 BODY: Message is 20% to 30% HTML
0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.5 HTML_TITLE_EMPTY BODY: HTML title contains no text
As Theo mentioned, 2.6 is ancient. You really can't expect a set of rules
and tools written, what, 2-3 years ago? to keep up with spammer tricks that
change every day. If 2.6 was up to it, there would have been no reason to
make the newr versions of SA!
1.1 SPF_NEUTRAL SPF: sender does not match SPF record
3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100%
2.0 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP
3.9 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL
That said, it appears that you aren't running either Bayes or network tests.
Bayes_99 has always been a real good way to get rid of spam. Here it is 3.5
points. On 2.6 I think it was closer to 4.0 points or maybe more. Note
there is also another 7+ points to be had from network tests, all of which
(except maybe SPF) are available in 2.6.
Loren
