OK, thanks. I will read the amavisd FAQ.
However, I am skeptical about your explanation for the spam score difference.
Here is an example of the automatically inserted spam headers:
Return-Path: <discount---coup...@acant.firm.in>
...
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793,
SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no
And here, I ran the same email through spamassassin manually from the
command line:
# spamassassin -t < spam_filename
Return-Path: <discount---coup...@acant.firm.in>
X-Spam-Report:
* 100 USER_IN_BLACKLIST From: address is in the user's black-list
* 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%
* [score: 1.0000]
* 3.3 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS
* [5.178.109.37 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
* 1.7 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist
* [URIs: acant.firm.in]
* 2.5 URIBL_DBL_SPAM Contains a spam URL listed in the DBL blocklist
* [URIs: acant.firm.in]
* 1.2 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist
* [URIs: acant.firm.in]
* 0.2 BAYES_999 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99.9 to 100%
* [score: 1.0000]
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
* 0.8 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS
* 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay
lines
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=113.3 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_99,BAYES_999,
HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS,RDNS_NONE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,URIBL_BLACK,
URIBL_DBL_SPAM,URIBL_JP_SURBL,USER_IN_BLACKLIST autolearn=no
version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Level: **************************************************
On 1/18/15, RW <rwmailli...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2015 09:06:00 -0700
> Michael Williamson wrote:
>
>> Yes, amavisd is running and modifying the file
>> "/etc/amavisd/amavisd.conf" has an effect on the spamassassin header
>> messages added to emails. Thanks, that answers that question.
>
> Amavisd uses SA as a library, you don't need to be running spamd.
>
> "service spamassassin restart" affect's neither amavisd nor the the
> spamassassin script, only tests done through spamc/spamd.
>
> You should read the Amavisd FAQ.
>
>> Now, the next question is, if I manually run
>>
>> # spamassassin -t < spam_filename
>>
>> I get a different, much higher spam score than is automatically
>> inserted in the X-Spam-Score
>> field. Note that, for this user, this has been done:
>
> You expect to get a higher score the second time. You've trained it as
> spam, and the delay causes it to hit more network test.
>
