Hi,
Nothing jumps out at me just looking at that. You said you ran --lint
with -D, did you run -t with -D?
Your Spam report is truncated so we can't see which rules are hit. When
you run spamassassin in test mode you should see a fuller report of the
rules that hit.
Mark Adams wrote:
Ok, Fair enough.. I will change this listing to a whitelist_from_rcvd as
I assume this list is farmed by spammers. (Should be using that always
of course!)
Header below.
Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from hopnet.hopkins.co.uk ([10.0.0.23] helo=mail.hopkins.co.uk)
by hopkins.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.63)
(envelope-from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
id 1HWSt9-0005j0-CG
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 08:48:11 +0100
Received: from [195.110.64.125] (helo=smtp.uk.colt.net)
by mail.hopkins.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.63)
(envelope-from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
id 1HWSt4-0005FR-5z
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 08:48:11 +0100
Received: from mail.pdcmltd.co.uk (unknown [213.86.218.37])
by smtp.uk.colt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 721B2126151; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 08:42:47 +0100 (BST)
Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Bury St Edmunds - Unit SU34
Importance: normal
Priority: normal
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C7710E.58A560A4"
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 08:54:43 +0100
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.607
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Bury St Edmunds - Unit SU34
thread-index: AcdxDTLGeReHjG9FQsG+HfB3+1kiMg==
From: "Guy Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "James Stonard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Steve Sawyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Lindsay,Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Tony White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Ivan Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Spam-Score: 40
X-Spam-Report: hits=4.0 required=5.0 test=NO_RDNS,VOWEL_
X-Original-Recipient: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
....
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 03:03:10PM +0100, Anthony Peacock wrote:
Hi,
Because, more often than not, the reason that whitelisting is not
matching is that the headers you think are matching are not. Or there
is a type in the whitelist.cf file.
By not allowing us to see the entire header, you are making us guess.
Mark Adams wrote:
Thanks for you reply.
Why would this make any difference?
"The headers checked for whitelist addresses are as follows: if
"Resent-From" is set, use that; otherwise check all addresses taken from
the following set of headers:
Envelope-Sender
Resent-Sender
X-Envelope-From
From
"
The only header that matches is "From:" which is the header I posted
below.
It seems as if it is not reading the whitelist_from entries at all. Or
whitelisting is somehow disabled, is that possible?
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 02:19:06PM +0100, Anthony Peacock wrote:
Hi,
I would think we need to see the FULL headers of this example email
before anyone can comment.
Mark Adams wrote:
Hi,
I have changed my reporting so it provides more information, and run
--test-mode with a message marked as spam, that should be whitelisted
whitelist.cf contents:
whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
when running spamassassin -D --lint, I see the following line
[18351] dbg: config: read file /etc/spamassassin/whitelist.cf
But when running test mode I still do not get any reports on it being
hit by the whitelist.
Help!
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 03:51:43PM +0100, Mark Adams wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 04:40:27PM -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote:
Mark Adams wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 10:06:51AM -0500, Bowie Bailey wrote:
Is it scoring the whitelist lower or is it just not hitting?
Can you post your whitelist rule and the headers from an example
message?
And why do you think this message should have hit the whitelist? Show
me the "From" line in the email.
Hi, Header excerpt below. Once again help appreciated.
From: Guy Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Spam-Score: 40
X-Spam-Report: hits=4.0 required=5.0 test=NO_RDNS,VOWEL_FROM_7
X-Original-Recipient: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Anthony Peacock
CHIME, Royal Free & University College Medical School
WWW: http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/~rmhiajp/
"If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange apples
then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an
idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us
will have two ideas." -- George Bernard Shaw
--
Anthony Peacock
CHIME, Royal Free & University College Medical School
WWW: http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/~rmhiajp/
"If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange apples
then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an
idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us
will have two ideas." -- George Bernard Shaw
--
Anthony Peacock
CHIME, Royal Free & University College Medical School
WWW: http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/~rmhiajp/
"If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange apples
then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an
idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us
will have two ideas." -- George Bernard Shaw
