RobertGrimes wrote
>
> Bowie Bailey wrote
>> First off, please quote the relevant portions of the message you are
>> replying to. Most of the users of this list use it as a mailing list
>> rather than a message board and cannot see the history of previous
>> messages unless they happen to have them saved.
>>
>> On 8/4/2014 3:28 PM, RobertGrimes wrote:
>>> First, I am running on a Windows 2003 server platform if that makes any
>>> difference with spamd. The only parameter I use is -l.
>>>
>>> I have tried running SA from a command line and I get significantly
>>> larger
>>> scores than what is being generated via hMailServer. I was thinking that
>>> the
>>> SA headers being added was confusing the command line version. If they
>>> are
>>> stripped, why such huge differences, like from about 2 to 10ish?
>>
>> This would tend to indicate that you are using different Bayes databases
>> (running SA as a different user than hMailServer does). To be sure
>> exactly what is happening, you would need to show us the original
>> headers vs the headers you get from your manual run.
>>
>>> I admit I don't have any clue about BayesDB so any info will be a huge
>>> help.
>>> I will go now and read up.
>>>
>>> To summarize, the main point of this thread was about how to run the
>>> same
>>> message through with different options. You are telling me getting
>>> message
>>> AFTER it goes through hMailServer is ok as it strips the headers. Now I
>>> have
>>> to figure out why it scores so low.
>>>
>>> Also, I need to do something with BayesDB.
>>
>> Most of the time, Bayes will take care of itself. Occasionally the
>> auto-learning routines will get it messed up. You can fix it by running
>> sa-learn manually to learn batches of spam and ham. In particular, you
>> should run sa-learn on any message that Bayes scores incorrectly. For
>> fastest learning, run sa-learn manually on ALL of the ham and spam that
>> comes through (after manually sorting the messages to make sure they are
>> all being learned the right way).
>>
>> --
>> Bowie
> Oops.
>
> I have changed the user that runs the spamd service to be the same as when
> I ran from command line. I will see what, if any changes occur. I will
> leave Bayes alone for the moment; just try one thing at a time to keep the
> confusion down.
>
> Thanks.
I just got a new message that scored 0 - here are the headers put in:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on server
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_HELO_PASS,
URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
I saved the messaged from outlook and ran spamc and got a score of 7.3 with
the headers of:
Received: from localhost by server
with SpamAssassin (version 3.4.0);
Mon, 04 Aug 2014 12:56:46 -0700
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on server
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Level: *******
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=7.3 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_DATE,MISSING_FROM,
MISSING_HEADERS,MISSING_MID,MISSING_SUBJECT,NO_HEADERS_MESSAGE,NO_RECEIVED,
NO_RELAYS,NULL_IN_BODY,URIBL_BLOCKED,URI_HEX autolearn=no
autolearn_force=no
version=3.4.0
both should be running under the same administrator account. Obviously
something is amiss but where do I start looking. I believe the high score as
the message surely is spam.
--
View this message in context:
http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/New-at-SpamAssassin-how-to-not-get-headers-tp110712p110719.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
