RE: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-28 Thread Zinski, Steve
work was to chown the files to nobody:nobody (and, yes, I had the directory permissions set to 777 too.) Steve -Original Message- From: Thomas Lindell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 2:17 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: RE: exim4 + forwa

RE: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-27 Thread Thomas Lindell
You could have just chmoded the directorys and files to 744 -Original Message- From: Zinski, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 12:37 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: RE: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin Well, guys, I think I resolved my

RE: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-27 Thread Zinski, Steve
Well, guys, I think I resolved my problem. Since exim runs under the "nobody" account (I could not get it to run as another user, believe me, I tried!), I simply copied all of the bayes files from a known working account to /.spamassassin and chown'ed them to "nobody". Everything is working great n

Re: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-27 Thread Stuart Johnston
jdow wrote: From: "Chr. v. Stuckrad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, jdow wrote: From: "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ... I've never seen the logic of placing SpamAssassin inside the incoming transaction before the termination of the SMTP connection rather than down the pipe in

Re: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-27 Thread jdow
From: "Chr. v. Stuckrad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, jdow wrote: From: "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ... I've never seen the logic of placing SpamAssassin inside the incoming transaction before the termination of the SMTP connection rather than down the pipe in the MDA. I

Re: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-27 Thread Chris Lear
mailing list that's probably a better place for these questions. Chris -Original Message- From: Stuart Johnston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 3:05 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin Your first scan i

Re: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-27 Thread Chr. v. Stuckrad
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, jdow wrote: > From: "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ... > I've never seen the logic of placing SpamAssassin inside the incoming > transaction before the termination of the SMTP connection rather than > down the pipe in the MDA. If you want to 'reject spam' (wih score over

Re: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-27 Thread jdow
From: "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Jul 26 07:58:20 vps spamd[7361]: spamd: result: . 2 - HTML_MESSAGE,URIBL_SBL,URIBL_WS_SURBL Jul 26 07:58:21 vps spamd[7361]: spamd: result: Y 7 - BAYES_99,FORGED_RCVD_HELO,HTML_50_60,HTML_MESSAGE,URIBL_SBL,URIBL_WS_SUR BL There are two obvious differenc

Re: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-27 Thread Loren Wilton
Jul 26 07:58:20 vps spamd[7361]: spamd: result: . 2 - HTML_MESSAGE,URIBL_SBL,URIBL_WS_SURBL Jul 26 07:58:21 vps spamd[7361]: spamd: result: Y 7 - BAYES_99,FORGED_RCVD_HELO,HTML_50_60,HTML_MESSAGE,URIBL_SBL,URIBL_WS_SUR BL There are two obvious differences here, Bayes and the forged header compl

RE: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-26 Thread Zinski, Steve
is the wording of the log entries. In the first pass, spamd says that it's "checking" the message. In the second pass it says "processing" the message. Steve -Original Message- From: Stuart Johnston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 3:05 PM To

Re: exim4 + forwarding + spamassassin

2006-07-26 Thread Stuart Johnston
Your first scan is running as nobody (that's bad) but the second is running as szinski. That would explain the BAYES_99. I'm not sure about the FORGED_RCVD_HELO and HTML_50_60 though. Zinski, Steve wrote: I need some help trying to figure out why spamassassin scores the same message differen