Re: [sa] Re: First run score: 25.7 Second: 2.6
I've used SA/spamd.exe for a while because it calculates very high scores on spams. -I thought- Then spams have appeared in people's inboxes and I needed to examine. I've used another batch file to log spamd spam scores. The commandline is: C:\NET\SpamAssassinWin32-EX\winspamc.exe C:\NET\SpamAssassinWin32-EX\realspam3.txt | Find X-Spam-Status: recover.log I ran the same command in a few seconds. Here are the newest results: 16.07.2010, 12:07:48 RESTARTED X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.6 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:08:13 OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.6 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:08:21 OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.6 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:09:44 OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=5.5 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:09:57 OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=5.5 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:10:00 OK X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=24.4 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:10:13 OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=5.5 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, OK means SA is alive, RESTARTED means spamd.exe crashed or port 783 non-responsive restarted. On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 7:20 PM, Charles Gregory cgreg...@hwcn.org wrote: On Thu, 15 Jul 2010, Emin Akbulut wrote: spamassassin.exe always calculates the same/correct score. Good... Goood. pamd second run reports only a few tests. Is it OK? I mean spamd runs all test but only adds which one increases score to it's report? Or these tests are processed tests list only? First run has tons of tests, second run has only 5 tests. I am presuming, by your description that the exact same *unmodified* file is passing through spamc/spamd all three times, and that there are no other variables. The spamc calls are literalyl one after the other, with no change of userid or other change that would possibly lead toa different set of configuration files being read. So this means that it is spamd itself that is 'different' on the second execution. You are going to need to enable verbose logging for spamd and do these three tests and see what messages appear in the logs (presumably) showing a failure to load config files on the second run. Is it possiblt that the file LOCKING on your system prevents spamd from accessing certain files under certain circumstances? What happens if you run ANY other messaeg through spamc as the 'second' run, and then run the third one on the orignial file? Is spamd sensitie to it being the same messaeg or just messes up on 8whatever* the second message would happen to be? Timing or content? - C
Re: [sa] Re: First run score: 25.7 Second: 2.6
Emin Akbulut wrote: I've used SA/spamd.exe for a while because it calculates very high scores on spams. -I thought- Then spams have appeared in people's inboxes and I needed to examine. I've used another batch file to log spamd spam scores. The commandline is: C:\NET\SpamAssassinWin32-EX\winspamc.exe C:\NET\SpamAssassinWin32-EX\realspam3.txt | Find X-Spam-Status: recover.log I ran the same command in a few seconds. Here are the newest results: 16.07.2010, 12:07:48 RESTARTED X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.6 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:08:13 OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.6 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:08:21 OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.6 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:09:44 OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=5.5 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:09:57 OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=5.5 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:10:00 OK X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=24.4 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, 16.07.2010, 12:10:13 OK X-Spam-Status: No, score=5.5 required=6.3 tests=HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32, Still looks like some sort of DNS based issue. Anyway, could you please paste the raw mail? I'll feed our spamd with it. Since we use the same binaries, this should give a first advice if it's really the SpamAssassin which is causing the problem. As already started, you could also try to enable debug output for Spamd, just start the executable with --debug --syslog=spamd.log parameter. Daniel -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/First-run-score%3A-25.7-Second%3A-2.6-tp29161519p29181827.html Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [sa] Re: First run score: 25.7 Second: 2.6
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010, Emin Akbulut wrote: spamassassin.exe always calculates the same/correct score. Good... Goood. pamd second run reports only a few tests. Is it OK? I mean spamd runs all test but only adds which one increases score to it's report? Or these tests are processed tests list only? First run has tons of tests, second run has only 5 tests. I am presuming, by your description that the exact same *unmodified* file is passing through spamc/spamd all three times, and that there are no other variables. The spamc calls are literalyl one after the other, with no change of userid or other change that would possibly lead toa different set of configuration files being read. So this means that it is spamd itself that is 'different' on the second execution. You are going to need to enable verbose logging for spamd and do these three tests and see what messages appear in the logs (presumably) showing a failure to load config files on the second run. Is it possiblt that the file LOCKING on your system prevents spamd from accessing certain files under certain circumstances? What happens if you run ANY other messaeg through spamc as the 'second' run, and then run the third one on the orignial file? Is spamd sensitie to it being the same messaeg or just messes up on 8whatever* the second message would happen to be? Timing or content? - C
