They are all applied. The trick is, so far there are very few, and only recently used, negative if pass tests. It might not be hard for Declude to add a %TESTPASSED% variable, but if you use a lot of tests, this will be a very long list, especially for good email. It has been suggested for them to add a mechanism to say "report these test if passed to some variable", but it may be fairly complex to add compared to the level of use. i.e. I know I use IPNOTINMX and NOLEGITCONTENT and that both are pass tests with a weight of -3, so if they are not in tests failed list I subtract 3 for each one, I know at a glance.
Thanks, Chuck Frolick ArgoNet, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Geiser Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] How Did DJM Pro Arrive At This Weight? Hi, Scott, > >We are using DJM Pro. I have a message that was "held" by DJM and I'm not > >clear on why it was "held". According to the headers the "weight" exceeded > >the current "hold weight" for the domain but I can't figure out how DJM > >added up the tests that it failed to come up with that "weight". > > The best way to troubleshoot weights is to use "LOGLEVEL MID" in the > \IMail\Declude\global.cfg file. This will add a line to the log file that > shows how Declude JunkMail came up with the weight (except that it does not > include weights from lines within filters; that should be changed soon). The current log level in "\imail\declude\global.cfg" file is set to HIGH. I'm assuming HIGH has the same stuff has MID (and more). How do I locate the relevant lines in the log file? Is there some of identifier in the original e-mail headers that I can use? > >If add up all of the weights... > > > >OSSOFT + EASYNET-DNSBL + SBL + ROUTING + WEIGHT05 + WEIGHT07 + WEIGHT09 + > >WEIGHT10 + WEIGHT13 + FILTER-MAILFROM > > > >I get... > > > >5 + 7 + 5 + 4 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + (-5) = 16 > > > >... but the number in brackets at the end of the "X-Spam-Tests-Failed:" is > >13. I can't figure out where it's coming up with the number 13. > > It's probably because you have a test with a "negative weight" -- one that > the E-mail did *not* fail, so a weight was subtracted from the total weight > of the E-mail. The IPNOTINMX and NOLEGITCONTENT tests are two tests that > work this way. It just so happens that IPNOTINMX is enabled in my global.cfg... - IPNOTINMX ipnotinmx x x 0 -3 - So, because of the nature of IPNOTINMX then if a message does NOT fail the IPNOTINMX then -3 points are added on to its weight? If so, then that explains the weight being 3 points lower. One thing that's of consternation to me here is that a test that's being applied to the message, i.e. IPNOTINMX, is not being represented in the headers of the message. Is there any way that DJM Pro can be configured to display not just "X-Spam-Tests-Failed:" but "X-Spam-Tests-Applied:"? Thanks for your always prompt feedback! Dan ==================================================================== This E-mail is scanned and free from viruses. www.nexustechgroup.com --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
