On 1/10/2013 11:49 AM, RW wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:43:44 -0500
> Ben Johnson wrote:
>
>
>> This observation begs the question: why are network tests being
>> performed for some messages but not others? To my knowledge, no
>> white/gray/black listing has been done on this box.
>
> As has already been said, the score from network tests is commonly a
> lot higher on retesting because of all the reporting that happened
> in-between.
>
RW,
I understand that, but that doesn't explain why if I retest a given
message by calling SpamAssassin directly, and I *disable network tests*,
the score is sometimes *higher* than when the message was scanned
initially with AMaViS.
When this message came through initially, the X-Spam-Status header was:
No, score=1.593 tagged_above=-999 required=2 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled
About an hour later, I fed the same message to the spamassassin
executable, while disabling network tests:
# spamassassin -L -t -D < /tmp/msg.txt
Content analysis details: (5.0 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ----------------------
--------------------------------------------------
3.8 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%
[score: 1.0000]
0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
1.2 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with
no rDNS
To restate the question, if network tests are not outright disabled in
Amavis, why is Amavis returning lower scores than the SA binary does
when called directly with network tests disabled? Shouldn't the SA score
with network tests disabled *always* be lower than or equal to the
Amavis score with network tests enabled (provided that all else is equal)?
Or am I way off-base here?
Thanks again,
-Ben
