https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6622

Karsten Bräckelmann <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID

--- Comment #4 from Karsten Bräckelmann <[email protected]> 2011-06-21 
16:21:41 UTC ---
Bryan, first of all -- scanning internal server logs and stuff with anti-virus
or anti-spam software is generally rather prone to trigger FPs. Simply because
the reports usually include the offending URIs and other snippets. Purely
internal server reports are best not scanned at all.

That said, I don't see any evidence in your sample attachment 4922, that SA
classified it spam. Whatever that ghastly binary format is, 'strings' quickly
reveals the following.

  SpamAssassin 3.1.9 (2007-02-13) on kaspersky-asia.com
  No, score=-96.2 required=5.0 tests=BIZ_TLD,HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_EXIST_TBODY,
  URI_NO_WWW_BIZ_CGI,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=no version=3.1.9

Whatever classified the report spam was NOT SA. Closing INVALID.

As others have pointed out already, if you need help resolving this and
figuring out why that mail ends up as spam, please tend to the users mailing
list.

-- 
Configure bugmail: 
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to