On 10/22/2014 7:31 AM, Dan McAllister wrote:
> On 10/21/2014 10:18 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
>> On 10/21/2014 05:45 PM, Dan McAllister wrote:
>>> OK, to review:
>>>
>>>   I have a QMT install that doesn't seem to be running SpamAssassin
>>> against inbound mail. I hope here to show what is going on so that
>>> someone can interpret the logs (better than I can).
>>>
>>> I have setup a forward on the domain that is not being scanned
>>> properly.
>>> Messages go into the account (through what should be a spam/virus
>>> scanner) and then gets bounced back to my regular mail server.
>>>
>>> Here are the header entries for the message going into the client's
>>> mail
>>> server (remember, log file entries work their way UP -- that is, new
>>> log
>>> entries go at the TOP of the header):
>>>
>>>     *Received:*(qmail 13916 invoked by uid 89); 22 Oct 2014 00:10:45
>>> -0000
>>>     *Received:*by simscan 1.4.0 ppid: 13908, pid: 13912, t: 0.3950s
>>>           scanners: attach: 1.4.0 clamav: 0.98.1/m:55/d:19525
>>>     *Received:*from unknown (HELO b-b-b.com) ([email protected]
>>>    
>>> <https://mail.it4soho.com/src/compose.php?send_to=dan%40it4soho.com>@10.11.12.13)
>>>     by
>>>           mail.host.com with ESMTPA; 22 Oct 2014 00:10:45 -0000
>>>
>>> And here are the headers for when the message comes back into my
>>> server...
>>>
>>>     *Received:*(qmail 13967 invoked by uid 89); 22 Oct 2014 00:11:03
>>> -0000
>>>     *Received:*by simscan 1.4.0 ppid: 13952, pid: 13955, t: 3.6881s
>>>           scanners: attach: 1.4.0 clamav: 0.98.1/m:55/d:19525 spam:
>>> 3.3.2
>>>     *X-Spam-Checker-Version:*SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on
>>>     host.it4soho.com
>>>     *X-Spam-Level:****
>>>     *X-Spam-Status:*No, score=3.3 required=5.0
>>>     tests=AWL,BAYES_99,HTML_MESSAGE,
>>>           RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2
>>>     *Received:*from unknown (HELO a-a-a.com) (1.2.3.4)
>>>           by mail.it4soho.com with SMTP; 22 Oct 2014 00:11:00 -0000
>>>
>>> Note the conspicuous ABSENCE of the X-Spam-* entries that come from
>>> SpamAssassin in the first collection...
>>>
>>> Now, when I look at the contents of the spamd log file, I see the same
>>> types of entries I see in the main server that DOES put the headers
>>> where they are expected.
>>>
>>> So I am next thinking there is an issue with SpamAssassin itself... but
>>> I have ZERO experience with SA (I have so much else to do, I typically
>>> turn it on and just let it go! Never debugged SA before!) :)
>>>
>>> Any help is appreciated..
>>>
>>> Dan
>>> IT4SOHO
>>
>> I'm real glad other have chimed in, because from what you've
>> described, I don't really have a clue.
>>
>> The Received: by simscan line above shows that spamassassin isn't
>> being used. Yet your simcontrol says that it should be.
>>
>> I think EricB may be on to something. Run cdb to activate the latest
>> simcontrol file.
>>
>> Short of that, I'd like to see samples of your spamd log file, and
>> the contents of your local.cf configuration file. Maybe something's
>> defeating sa there.
>>
>> Who knows what you did to turn it off??? ;)
>> The normal way would be to modify the simcontrol file, then run
>> "qmailctl cdb".
>>
>> Let us know how you make out.
>> Thanks.
>>
>
> Agreed - the "normal" way would be the simcontrol file followed by a
> CDB rebuild... but I checked that first...
>
> Per the OTHER Eric's request:
> 1) spamd is in the /var/qmail/supervise folder and the run file
> matches my "good" server
>     exec /usr/bin/spamd -x -u vpopmail -s stderr 2>&1
> 2) the contents of the simcontrol file have been posted already, but are:
>     :clam=yes,spam=yes,spam_hits=12,attach=.mp3:.src:.bat:.pif
> 3) per Eric Shubert's request, contents of the spamd log file
>
>     # qmlog spamd | tail
>     10-22 09:29:09 Oct 22 09:29:09.397 [7613] info: spamd: connection
>     from localhost [127.0.0.1] at port 50523
>     10-22 09:29:09 Oct 22 09:29:09.401 [7613] info: spamd: processing
>     message <053A7D23649B4DB25B2DBE8718FFE98FE55CF97F@APPSERVER3> for
>     clamav:89
>     10-22 09:29:09 Oct 22 09:29:09.899 [7613] info: spamd: clean
>     message (1.3/5.0) for clamav:89 in 0.5 seconds, 8275 bytes.
>     10-22 09:29:09 Oct 22 09:29:09.899 [7613] info: spamd: result: . 1
>     - HTML_MESSAGE,RDNS_NONE
>     
> scantime=0.5,size=8275,user=clamav,uid=89,required_score=5.0,rhost=localhost,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=50523,mid=<053A7D23649B4DB25B2DBE8718FFE98FE55CF97F@APPSERVER3>,autolearn=no
>     10-22 09:29:09 Oct 22 09:29:09.933 [27470] info: prefork: child
>     states: II
>     10-22 09:29:32 Oct 22 09:29:32.780 [7613] info: spamd: connection
>     from localhost [127.0.0.1] at port 50525
>     10-22 09:29:32 Oct 22 09:29:32.784 [7613] info: spamd: processing
>     message <[email protected]> for clamav:89
>     10-22 09:29:32 Oct 22 09:29:32.963 [7613] info: spamd: clean
>     message (1.2/5.0) for clamav:89 in 0.2 seconds, 9156 bytes.
>     10-22 09:29:32 Oct 22 09:29:32.964 [7613] info: spamd: result: . 1
>     - DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HTML_MESSAGE,RDNS_NONE
>     
> scantime=0.2,size=9156,user=clamav,uid=89,required_score=5.0,rhost=localhost,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=50525,mid=<[email protected]>,autolearn=no
>     10-22 09:29:32 Oct 22 09:29:32.999 [27470] info: prefork: child
>     states: II
>
> I'm learning more and more about simscan & spamassassin -- more than I
> think I ever really wanted to know :)
>
> Thanks in advance for any help offered.
>
> Dan McAllister
> IT4SOHO
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> IT4SOHO, LLC
> 33 - 4th Street N, Suite 211
> St. Petersburg, FL 33701-3806
>
> CALL TOLL FREE:
>   877-IT4SOHO
>
> 877-484-7646 Phone
> 727-647-7646 Local
> 727-490-4394 Fax 
>
> We have support plans for QMail!
>
Dan,

Can you create an email--I did it my simply saving a draft--and then
pipe it into 'spamc' manually to test 'spamd' and see if it adds the
Spamassassin header?

I piped the email in my drafts folder into spamc by doing the following:

# cat 'email in drafts folder' | spamc

And got all the headers.

I also piped a simple text file with arbitrary content into 'spamc' and
got all the Spamassassin headers.

This might be an easier way of testing.

Eric

Reply via email to