Hi Aleks, On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 09:35:39PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Hi Aleks, > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > > > For now it only adds the "x-bogosity" header to the e-mail and still > > > delivers it so that I can monitor the activity, but the purpose is to > > > very quickly switch to dropping those marked as spam (which are the > > > majority of those people complain about). > > > > > > I did a few configuration changes for this in the delivery path but > > > nothing that should be visible except this new header. I'm just seeing > > > the last spam marked as such, after a few other ones I'll configure it > > > to block. If you notice that an e-mail from you seems to get blocked > > > or to be bouncing, please do report it to me directly so that I can > > > check what is happening. > > > > The mail from "ad3 <a...@qq.com>" was tagged like this. > > > > X-Bogosity: Unsure, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.972880, version=1.2.4 > > > > Does this mean that this mail is not tagged as spam, right? > > Yep exactly. If at least we get rid of all the readable ads which > require us to actually read the subjects before deleting them, > that will be a nice improvement already.
By the way I found why it was tagged as "unsure" instead of "spam". I didn't specify "-M" in the script so it didn't consider the input file was an mbox, hence it probably used to consider the headers in the evaluation, leading to a confusing result. With "-M" it clearly states it's a spam. I've now updated the script to locally archive these e-mails instead of delivering them. I'll keep an eye on the for some time and will deliver them manually if I see some wrong blocking. Cheers, Willy
