spamd not properly resetting whitelist?

[Bart Schaefer <ba...@gmail.com>]

We recently installed a new CentOS4 server, which comes with SA 3.0.6
prepackaged, to serve as our local mail store (runs sendmail,
clamassassin, spamd, and an imap server).  The perl version is 5.8.5,
and it's an x86_64 platform.

Since migrating our users to this machine we frequently have spam
mis-classified as ham with USER_IN_WHITELIST as the culprit.  There
are no whitelist_from or whitelist_from_rcvd directives at the
/etc/mail/spamassassin/* level, and only one user who has any of these
directives in his user_prefs file, but *every* user has at random
times had spam mismarked as whitelisted.

In every case the spam so mis-marked was forwarded from a role address
on another server that matches one of the whitelist_from_rcvd lines in
the single aforementioned user_prefs.  If the same misclassified
message is put through "spamassasssin" rather than spamd, or even if
it is run through "spamc" a second time, USER_IN_WHITELIST disappears
(the rest of the rules hit remain unchanged).

Looking at the mail logs, there does seem to be a correlation:  If the
first message scanned by a new spamd child is scanned on behalf of the
user who has whiltelist lines in his user_prefs, every other message
scanned by that child is misclassified.  As long as the very first
scan is not for this user, the child behaves properly with respect to
the whitelist settings.

I don't see any bugzilla for this using a search on USER_IN_WHITELIST.
 Has anyone else  encountered this issue?  Can anyone verify that it's
fixed in 3.1?

Re: spamd not properly resetting whitelist?

[Loren Wilton <lw...@earthlink.net>]

> I don't see any bugzilla for this using a search on USER_IN_WHITELIST.
>  Has anyone else  encountered this issue?  Can anyone verify that it's
> fixed in 3.1?

I thiought someone had complained of this about a month ago, but perhaps it
was something else.  This sounds like Yet Another of the problems with
per-user settings being a bit more sticky than they should be.

The workaround is to set the number of lives for spamd children to 1, but
this increases your system overhead.

        Loren