Re: New Release Candidate: 3.4.3-rc6 Testers Needed
On Wed, 20 Nov 2019, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: +1 to the one line change from info to dbg Me too. -- John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ jhar...@impsec.orgFALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79 --- The job of QA is to try their hardest to embarrass the developers privately, because users will be doing their damnedest to do so publicly. --- 965 days since the first commercial re-flight of an orbital booster (SpaceX)
Re: New Release Candidate: 3.4.3-rc6 Testers Needed
Fyi the main problem is old DNS answers getting around there SA already
finished. Fixed this in trunk a while ago along with some other cleanups.
I don't see it necessary for 3.4.3, been too many delays already, it's
mainly cosmetic.
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision=1866126
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 01:45:01PM -0500, Bill Cole wrote:
> +1 for this. Noting the problem at 'info' is good.
>
>
> On 20 Nov 2019, at 13:41, Henrik K wrote:
>
> >On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 07:29:10PM +0100, Giovanni Bechis wrote:
> >>anybody against this diff ?
> >>
> >> Giovanni
> >>
> >>Index: lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm
> >>===
> >>--- lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm(revision 1870052)
> >>+++ lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm(working copy)
> >>@@ -858,7 +858,7 @@
> >> if ($rcode eq 'REFUSED' || $id =~
> >>m{^\d+/NO_QUESTION_IN_PACKET\z}) {
> >> # the failure was already reported above
> >> } else {
> >>-info("dns: no callback for id %s, ignored; packet: %s",
> >>+dbg("dns: no callback for id %s, ignored; packet: %s",
> >> $id, $packet ? $packet->string : "undef" );
> >> }
> >> # report a likely matching query for diagnostic purposes
> >
> >If you would check trunk it's already there. Please use the same code for
> >uniformity.
> >
> >info("dns: no callback for id $id, ignored, packet on next
> >debug line");
> ># prevent filling normal logs with huge packet dumps
> >dbg("dns: %s", $packet ? $packet->string : "undef");
>
>
> --
> Bill Cole
> b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
> (AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
> Not Currently Available For Hire
Re: New Release Candidate: 3.4.3-rc6 Testers Needed
+1 for this. Noting the problem at 'info' is good.
On 20 Nov 2019, at 13:41, Henrik K wrote:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 07:29:10PM +0100, Giovanni Bechis wrote:
anybody against this diff ?
Giovanni
Index: lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm
===
--- lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm(revision 1870052)
+++ lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm(working copy)
@@ -858,7 +858,7 @@
if ($rcode eq 'REFUSED' || $id =~
m{^\d+/NO_QUESTION_IN_PACKET\z}) {
# the failure was already reported above
} else {
-info("dns: no callback for id %s, ignored; packet: %s",
+dbg("dns: no callback for id %s, ignored; packet: %s",
$id, $packet ? $packet->string : "undef" );
}
# report a likely matching query for diagnostic purposes
If you would check trunk it's already there. Please use the same code
for
uniformity.
info("dns: no callback for id $id, ignored, packet on next
debug line");
# prevent filling normal logs with huge packet dumps
dbg("dns: %s", $packet ? $packet->string : "undef");
--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Not Currently Available For Hire
Re: New Release Candidate: 3.4.3-rc6 Testers Needed
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 07:29:10PM +0100, Giovanni Bechis wrote:
> anybody against this diff ?
>
> Giovanni
>
> Index: lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm
> ===
> --- lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm (revision 1870052)
> +++ lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm (working copy)
> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@
>if ($rcode eq 'REFUSED' || $id =~ m{^\d+/NO_QUESTION_IN_PACKET\z})
> {
> # the failure was already reported above
>} else {
> -info("dns: no callback for id %s, ignored; packet: %s",
> +dbg("dns: no callback for id %s, ignored; packet: %s",
> $id, $packet ? $packet->string : "undef" );
>}
># report a likely matching query for diagnostic purposes
If you would check trunk it's already there. Please use the same code for
uniformity.
info("dns: no callback for id $id, ignored, packet on next debug
line");
# prevent filling normal logs with huge packet dumps
dbg("dns: %s", $packet ? $packet->string : "undef");
Re: New Release Candidate: 3.4.3-rc6 Testers Needed
+1 to the one line change from info to dbg
On 11/20/2019 1:29 PM, Giovanni Bechis wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 12:14:18PM -0500, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 02:20:15AM -0500, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>>> 3.4.3 release candidate 6 is now available at
>>> http://talon2.pccc.com/~kmcgrail/devel/ or
>>> http://people.apache.org/~kmcgrail/devel/
>>>
>>> PLEASE NOTE: One of the hold-ups for releasing 3.4.3 has been finding
>>> little bugs while testing new features. As such, we could really use
>>> some people testing the release candidates. I am running these release
>>> candidates in production and have no reservations recommending the same.
>> I uploaded 3.4.3-rc6 to Debian testing and unstable. Hopefully this
>> gets a little more test exposure, though I don't know that there are
>> many people using these distro branches as part of their mail
>> infrastructure. I'll pass along anything I do hear, though.
>>
>> I'm also running rc6 on my mail gateway.
>>
>> The only thing I've noticed so far is the appearance of logs such as the
>> one below. This was discussed briefly in
>> https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7033, in the context
>> of 3.4.0, but was not seen as an issue. However, something has
>> definitely changed with 3.4.3(-rc6). I never saw these messages on my
>> mail host with previous versions of spamassassin (literally zero
>> occurrences in years), but I see dozens of them daily with 3.4.3. I
>> have not changed any other dependencies on this host.
>>
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: no callback for id
>> 55444/IN/A/99.29.145.198.dnsbl.sorbs.net, ignored; packet: ;; Response
>> received from 127.0.0.1 (58 octets)
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; HEADER SECTION
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; id = 55444
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; qr = 1 aa = 0 tc = 0 rd =
>> 1 opcode = QUERY
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; ra = 1 z = 0 ad = 0 cd = 0
>> rcode = SERVFAIL
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; qdcount = 1 ancount = 0
>> nscount = 0 arcount = 1
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; do = 0
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; EDNS version 0
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; flags:
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; rcode: NOERROR
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; size: 4096
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; option:
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...]
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; QUESTION SECTION (1 record)
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;;
>> 99.29.145.198.dnsbl.sorbs.net. IN A
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...]
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; ANSWER SECTION (0 records)
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...]
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; AUTHORITY SECTION (0
>> records)
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...]
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION (1
>> record)
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; EDNS version 0
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; flags:
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; rcode: NOERROR
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; size: 4096
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; option:
>> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: no likely matching queries for id
>> 55444
>>
>> I haven't looked deeply into what has changed. IMO logging something
>> when DNS returns a SERVFAIL makes sense, but this level of detail should
>> probably be reserved for debug severity.
>>
> anybody against this diff ?
>
> Giovanni
>
> Index: lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm
> ===
> --- lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm (revision 1870052)
> +++ lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm (working copy)
> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@
>if ($rcode eq 'REFUSED' || $id =~ m{^\d+/NO_QUESTION_IN_PACKET\z})
> {
> # the failure was already reported above
>} else {
> -info("dns: no callback for id %s, ignored; packet: %s",
> +dbg("dns: no callback for id %s, ignored; packet: %s",
> $id, $packet ? $packet->string : "undef" );
>}
># report a likely matching query for diagnostic purposes
--
Kevin A. McGrail
kmcgr...@apache.org
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
Re: New Release Candidate: 3.4.3-rc6 Testers Needed
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 12:14:18PM -0500, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 02:20:15AM -0500, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> >
> > 3.4.3 release candidate 6 is now available at
> > http://talon2.pccc.com/~kmcgrail/devel/ or
> > http://people.apache.org/~kmcgrail/devel/
> >
> > PLEASE NOTE: One of the hold-ups for releasing 3.4.3 has been finding
> > little bugs while testing new features. As such, we could really use
> > some people testing the release candidates. I am running these release
> > candidates in production and have no reservations recommending the same.
>
> I uploaded 3.4.3-rc6 to Debian testing and unstable. Hopefully this
> gets a little more test exposure, though I don't know that there are
> many people using these distro branches as part of their mail
> infrastructure. I'll pass along anything I do hear, though.
>
> I'm also running rc6 on my mail gateway.
>
> The only thing I've noticed so far is the appearance of logs such as the
> one below. This was discussed briefly in
> https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7033, in the context
> of 3.4.0, but was not seen as an issue. However, something has
> definitely changed with 3.4.3(-rc6). I never saw these messages on my
> mail host with previous versions of spamassassin (literally zero
> occurrences in years), but I see dozens of them daily with 3.4.3. I
> have not changed any other dependencies on this host.
>
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: no callback for id
> 55444/IN/A/99.29.145.198.dnsbl.sorbs.net, ignored; packet: ;; Response
> received from 127.0.0.1 (58 octets)
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; HEADER SECTION
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; id = 55444
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; qr = 1 aa = 0 tc = 0 rd = 1
> opcode = QUERY
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; ra = 1 z = 0 ad = 0 cd = 0
> rcode = SERVFAIL
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; qdcount = 1 ancount = 0
> nscount = 0 arcount = 1
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; do = 0
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; EDNS version 0
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; flags:
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; rcode: NOERROR
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; size: 4096
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; option:
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...]
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; QUESTION SECTION (1 record)
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;;
> 99.29.145.198.dnsbl.sorbs.net. IN A
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...]
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; ANSWER SECTION (0 records)
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...]
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; AUTHORITY SECTION (0
> records)
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...]
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION (1
> record)
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; EDNS version 0
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; flags:
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; rcode: NOERROR
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; size: 4096
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; option:
> Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: no likely matching queries for id
> 55444
>
> I haven't looked deeply into what has changed. IMO logging something
> when DNS returns a SERVFAIL makes sense, but this level of detail should
> probably be reserved for debug severity.
>
anybody against this diff ?
Giovanni
Index: lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm
===
--- lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm(revision 1870052)
+++ lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm(working copy)
@@ -858,7 +858,7 @@
if ($rcode eq 'REFUSED' || $id =~ m{^\d+/NO_QUESTION_IN_PACKET\z}) {
# the failure was already reported above
} else {
-info("dns: no callback for id %s, ignored; packet: %s",
+dbg("dns: no callback for id %s, ignored; packet: %s",
$id, $packet ? $packet->string : "undef" );
}
# report a likely matching query for diagnostic purposes
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: New Release Candidate: 3.4.3-rc6 Testers Needed
On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 02:20:15AM -0500, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > > 3.4.3 release candidate 6 is now available at > http://talon2.pccc.com/~kmcgrail/devel/ or > http://people.apache.org/~kmcgrail/devel/ > > PLEASE NOTE: One of the hold-ups for releasing 3.4.3 has been finding > little bugs while testing new features. As such, we could really use > some people testing the release candidates. I am running these release > candidates in production and have no reservations recommending the same. I uploaded 3.4.3-rc6 to Debian testing and unstable. Hopefully this gets a little more test exposure, though I don't know that there are many people using these distro branches as part of their mail infrastructure. I'll pass along anything I do hear, though. I'm also running rc6 on my mail gateway. The only thing I've noticed so far is the appearance of logs such as the one below. This was discussed briefly in https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7033, in the context of 3.4.0, but was not seen as an issue. However, something has definitely changed with 3.4.3(-rc6). I never saw these messages on my mail host with previous versions of spamassassin (literally zero occurrences in years), but I see dozens of them daily with 3.4.3. I have not changed any other dependencies on this host. Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: no callback for id 55444/IN/A/99.29.145.198.dnsbl.sorbs.net, ignored; packet: ;; Response received from 127.0.0.1 (58 octets) Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; HEADER SECTION Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; id = 55444 Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; qr = 1 aa = 0 tc = 0 rd = 1 opcode = QUERY Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; ra = 1 z = 0 ad = 0 cd = 0 rcode = SERVFAIL Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; qdcount = 1 ancount = 0 nscount = 0 arcount = 1 Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; do = 0 Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; EDNS version 0 Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; flags: Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; rcode: NOERROR Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; size: 4096 Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; option: Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; QUESTION SECTION (1 record) Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; 99.29.145.198.dnsbl.sorbs.net. IN A Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; ANSWER SECTION (0 records) Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; AUTHORITY SECTION (0 records) Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION (1 record) Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; EDNS version 0 Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; flags: Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; rcode: NOERROR Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; size: 4096 Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: [...] ;; option: Nov 20 09:54:53 amarth spamd[3976]: dns: no likely matching queries for id 55444 I haven't looked deeply into what has changed. IMO logging something when DNS returns a SERVFAIL makes sense, but this level of detail should probably be reserved for debug severity. Otherwise, so far, so good. Are there any specific features that you want to get additional testing? noah
Rule updates are too old - 2019-11-20 3.3.0:2019-11-19 3.3.1:2019-11-19 3.3.2:2019-11-19
SpamAssassin version 3.3.0 has not had a rule update since 2019-11-19. SpamAssassin version 3.3.1 has not had a rule update since 2019-11-19. SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 has not had a rule update since 2019-11-19. 20191119: Spam and ham are above threshold of 150,000: http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?daterev=20191119 20191119: Spam: 990774, Ham: 764385 The spam and ham counts on which this script alerts are from http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?daterev=20191119 Click "(source details)" (it's tiny and low contrast). It's from the second and third columns of the line that ends with "(all messages)" The source to this script is http://www.chaosreigns.com/sa/update-version-mon.pl It looks like both the weekly and nightly masschecks need to have sufficient corpora in order for an update to be generated.
[auto] bad sandbox rules report
HTTP get: https://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/1-days-ago?xml=1 HTTP get: https://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/2-days-ago?xml=1 HTTP get: https://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/3-days-ago?xml=1 Bad performing rules, from the past 3 night's mass-checks. (Note: 'net' rules will be listed as 'no hits' unless you set 'tflags net'. This also applies for meta rules which use 'net' rules.) rulesrc/sandbox/smf/30_smf_nontest.cf (4 rules, 1 bad): FSL_LINK_AWS_S3_WEB: no hits of target type rulesrc/sandbox/smf/20_smf.cf (42 rules, 37 bad): FSL_ABUSED_WEB_1: bad, avg S/O=0.56 avg Spam%=3.44 avg Ham%=2.70 FSL_ABUSED_WEB_2: bad, avg S/O=0.50 avg Spam%=0.71 avg Ham%=0.70 FSL_ABUSED_WEB_3: bad, avg S/O=0.52 avg Spam%=1.55 avg Ham%=1.45 FSL_NOT_FROM_AOL: bad, avg S/O=0.48 avg Spam%=0.00 avg Ham%=0.00 FSL_NOT_FROM_HOTMAIL: bad, avg S/O=0.32 avg Spam%=0.03 avg Ham%=0.06 FSL_NOT_FROM_YAHOO: bad, avg S/O=0.56 avg Spam%=0.00 avg Ham%=0.00 FSL_NO_RCVD_1: bad, avg S/O=0.02 avg Spam%=0.04 avg Ham%=2.46 FSL_RCVD_EX_0: bad, avg S/O=0.01 avg Spam%=0.04 avg Ham%=3.21 FSL_RCVD_EX_1: bad, avg S/O=0.67 avg Spam%=50.03 avg Ham%=24.80 FSL_RCVD_EX_2: bad, avg S/O=0.54 avg Spam%=31.36 avg Ham%=26.28 FSL_RCVD_EX_3: bad, avg S/O=0.13 avg Spam%=4.37 avg Ham%=29.11 FSL_RCVD_EX_4: bad, avg S/O=0.53 avg Spam%=7.25 avg Ham%=6.48 FSL_RCVD_EX_5: bad, avg S/O=0.45 avg Spam%=3.42 avg Ham%=4.24 FSL_RCVD_EX_GT_5: bad, avg S/O=0.37 avg Spam%=3.52 avg Ham%=5.87 FSL_RCVD_TR_1: bad, avg S/O=0.10 avg Spam%=2.31 avg Ham%=19.85 FSL_RCVD_TR_4: bad, avg S/O=0.27 avg Spam%=0.05 avg Ham%=0.19 FSL_RCVD_TR_5: bad, avg S/O=0.76 avg Spam%=54.58 avg Ham%=17.73 FSL_RCVD_TR_GT_5: bad, avg S/O=0.21 avg Spam%=0.03 avg Ham%=0.12 FSL_RCVD_UT_1: bad, avg S/O=0.67 avg Spam%=50.03 avg Ham%=24.80 FSL_RCVD_UT_2: bad, avg S/O=0.54 avg Spam%=31.36 avg Ham%=26.28 FSL_RCVD_UT_3: bad, avg S/O=0.13 avg Spam%=4.37 avg Ham%=29.11 FSL_RCVD_UT_4: bad, avg S/O=0.53 avg Spam%=7.25 avg Ham%=6.48 FSL_RCVD_UT_5: bad, avg S/O=0.45 avg Spam%=3.42 avg Ham%=4.24 FSL_RCVD_UT_GT_5: bad, avg S/O=0.37 avg Spam%=3.52 avg Ham%=5.87 FSL_UNDISCLOSED_RCPTS: bad, avg S/O=0.78 avg Spam%=0.31 avg Ham%=0.09 __FSL_COUNT_EXTERN: bad, avg S/O=0.51 avg Spam%=99.96 avg Ham%=96.79 # used in: FSL_RCVD_EX_0 FSL_RCVD_EX_1 FSL_RCVD_EX_2 FSL_RCVD_EX_3 FSL_RCVD_EX_4 FSL_RCVD_EX_5 FSL_RCVD_EX_GT_5 __FSL_COUNT_TRUST: bad, avg S/O=0.69 avg Spam%=91.87 avg Ham%=41.32 # used in: FSL_NO_RCVD_1 FSL_RCVD_TR_1 FSL_RCVD_TR_4 FSL_RCVD_TR_5 FSL_RCVD_TR_GT_5 __FSL_COUNT_UNTRUST: bad, avg S/O=0.51 avg Spam%=99.96 avg Ham%=96.79 # used in: FSL_NO_RCVD_1 FSL_RCVD_UT_1 FSL_RCVD_UT_2 FSL_RCVD_UT_3 FSL_RCVD_UT_4 FSL_RCVD_UT_5 FSL_RCVD_UT_GT_5 __FSL_ENVFROM_AOL: bad, avg S/O=0.37 avg Spam%=0.00 avg Ham%=0.00 # used in: FSL_NOT_FROM_AOL __FSL_ENVFROM_HOTMAIL: bad, avg S/O=0.32 avg Spam%=0.03 avg Ham%=0.06 # used in: FSL_NOT_FROM_HOTMAIL __FSL_ENVFROM_LIVE: bad, avg S/O=0.07 avg Spam%=0.00 avg Ham%=0.00 # used in: FSL_NOT_FROM_HOTMAIL __FSL_ENVFROM_ROCKET: no hits at all # used in: FSL_NOT_FROM_YAHOO __FSL_ENVFROM_YAHOO: bad, avg S/O=0.28 avg Spam%=0.00 avg Ham%=0.01 # used in: FSL_NOT_FROM_YAHOO __FSL_RELAY_AOL: bad, avg S/O=0.79 avg Spam%=0.01 avg Ham%=0.00 # used in: FSL_NOT_FROM_AOL __FSL_RELAY_GOOGLE: bad, avg S/O=0.05 avg Spam%=0.16 avg Ham%=3.13 # used in: TO_IN_SUBJ URI_GOOGLE_PROXY __FSL_RELAY_HOTMAIL: bad, avg S/O=0.22 avg Spam%=0.00 avg Ham%=0.01 # used in: FSL_NOT_FROM_HOTMAIL __FSL_RELAY_YAHOO: bad, avg S/O=0.21 avg Spam%=0.08 avg Ham%=0.32 # used in: FSL_NOT_FROM_YAHOO rulesrc/sandbox/pds/20_ntld.cf (23 rules, 6 bad): BULK_RE_SUSP_NTLD: bad, avg S/O=0.15 avg Spam%=0.00 avg Ham%=0.00 GOOGLE_DRIVE_REPLY_BAD_NTLD: no hits at all SENT_TO_EMAIL_ADDR: no hits at all VPS_NO_NTLD: no hits at all __PDS_SENT_TO_EMAIL_ADDR: no hits at all # used in: SENT_TO_EMAIL_ADDR __VPSNUMBERONLY_TLD: no hits at all # used in: VPS_NO_NTLD rulesrc/sandbox/pds/20_gdocs.cf (10 rules, 4 bad): __PDS_GOOGLE_DRIVE_SHARE: no hits of target type # used in: GOOGLE_DRIVE_REPLY_BAD_NTLD __PDS_GOOGLE_DRIVE_SHARE_1: bad, avg S/O=0.10 avg Spam%=0.00 avg Ham%=0.00 # used in: GOOGLE_DRIVE_REPLY_BAD_NTLD __PDS_GOOGLE_DRIVE_SHARE __PDS_GOOGLE_DRIVE_SHARE_2: no hits of target type # used in: GOOGLE_DRIVE_REPLY_BAD_NTLD __PDS_GOOGLE_DRIVE_SHARE __PDS_GOOGLE_DRIVE_SHARE_3: no hits at all # used in: GOOGLE_DRIVE_REPLY_BAD_NTLD __PDS_GOOGLE_DRIVE_SHARE rulesrc/sandbox/pds/10_menaces.cf (20 rules, 6 bad): BODY_QUOTE_MALF_MSGID: bad, avg S/O=0.45 avg Spam%=0.57 avg Ham%=0.69 PDS_DBL_URL_ILLEGAL_CHARS: bad, avg S/O=0.21 avg Spam%=0.00 avg Ham%=0.00 PDS_DBL_URL_LINKBAIT: bad, avg S/O=0.43 avg Spam%=0.00 avg Ham%=0.00 PDS_DOUBLE_URL: bad, avg S/O=0.13 avg Spam%=0.94 avg Ham%=6.29 __PDS_BODY_QUOTE: bad, avg S/O=0.52 avg
