You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Yousef Raffah <yr...@savola.com> on 2006/03/07 10:48:35 UTC
How can I increase the score of a spam message?
Hi,
One of the spam messages I received in my inbox today hit the following
triggers:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.863 tagged_above=-100 required=6.3
tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=1.867, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_1=0.948, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=2.046]
How can I increase the score of this message?
Sincerely,
Yousef Raffah
Senior Systems Administrator
SSIS - The Savola Group
--
Aren't you using Firefox? Get it at getfirefox.com
yousef.raffah.com
Re: How can I increase the score of a spam message?
Posted by Yousef Raffah <yr...@savola.com>.
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 02:34 -0800, Loren Wilton wrote:
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.863 tagged_above=-100 required=6.3
> tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=1.867, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
> HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_1=0.948, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=2.046]
>
> > How can I increase the score of this message?
>
> 1. Train Bayes. It doesn't know if this is ham or spam. You can get
> another 3 points or so (depending on version) if Bayes was convinced this
> was spam.
>
Thank you for the reply.
Maybe I should train the bayes as you said. Will have to see how to
correctly train it, but I'm afraid it get poisoned since this is a site
wide setup, not on user bases!
> 2. It looks like you may be on 2.63 or so. Move to 3.0.5 or 3.1.x, and
> make sure the URIBL rules are enabled, as they are by default.
>
I'm running spamassassin 3.1.0. Do you mean URIBL as network tests? I
have pyzor, DCC and razor tests enabled.
> 3. With only the spam score and nothing else from the message, it is
> impossible to make any other useful guesses.
>
:(
> Loren
>
Sincerely,
Yousef Raffah
Senior Systems Administrator
SSIS - The Savola Group
--
Aren't you using Firefox? Get it at getfirefox.com
yousef.raffah.com
Re: How can I increase the score of a spam message?
Posted by Loren Wilton <lw...@earthlink.net>.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.863 tagged_above=-100 required=6.3
tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=1.867, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_1=0.948, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=2.046]
> How can I increase the score of this message?
1. Train Bayes. It doesn't know if this is ham or spam. You can get
another 3 points or so (depending on version) if Bayes was convinced this
was spam.
2. It looks like you may be on 2.63 or so. Move to 3.0.5 or 3.1.x, and
make sure the URIBL rules are enabled, as they are by default.
3. With only the spam score and nothing else from the message, it is
impossible to make any other useful guesses.
Loren
RE: Any windows users try the new Active Perl with SA?
Posted by Bret Miller <br...@wcg.org>.
> I tried this as a sink on an exchange box and it doesn't
> fork. It processes one emai at a time. It can take from
> 15-30 seconds per email depending on the size and speed of
> your system. So, it didn't take vary long before the
> incoming queue was getting backed up. I ended up disabling
> the sing and flushing the queue 2-3 times a day. Better to
> run it on a linux or bsd gateway box infront of your windows
> based email server.
That's the Exchange Sink's fault, not SA's. I use SA with CGPSA on
CommuniGate Pro and it forks just fine on Windows. Convincing the Sink
author to not single-thread the requests might be the hardest part...
It's not very efficient to fork on Windows, but it's better than
single-threading the requests if you've got the hardware to handle
multiple SA processes.
Bret
> >> I am wondering if anyone running Windows and SA has tried the new
> >> ActivePerl with 3.1.1?
> >
> > Now running ActivePerl 5.8.8.816 with SA 3.1.1 on Windows
> Server 2003.
> > My SpamAssassin won't lint... Ugh.
> >
> > "EADDRINUSE" is not exported by the Errno module
> > Can't continue after import errors at
> > C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm line 45 BEGIN
> > failed--compilation aborted at
> > C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm line 45.
> Compilation
> > failed in require at C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin.pm
> > line 75.
> > BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at
> > C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin.pm line 75. Compilation
> failed in
> > require at spamassassin line 78. BEGIN failed--compilation
> aborted at
> > spamassassin line 78.
> >
> >
> > It doesn't have the same problem on Windows XP... Wonder what the
> > difference is? I used the same install procedure on both. The funny
> > part is that the module interface still works fine and it's running
> > correctly under CGPSA, so it works, but doesn't --lint. Go figure.
> > I'll do some more digging. Anyone else have an idea where to look?
RE: Any windows users try the new Active Perl with SA?
Posted by es...@ihms.net.
I tried this as a sink on an exchange box and it doesn't fork. It
processes one emai at a time. It can take from 15-30 seconds per email
depending on the size and speed of your system. So, it didn't take vary
long before the incoming queue was getting backed up. I ended up
disabling the sing and flushing the queue 2-3 times a day. Better to run
it on a linux or bsd gateway box infront of your windows based email
server.
Eric
>> I am wondering if anyone running Windows and SA has tried the new
>> ActivePerl with 3.1.1?
>
> Now running ActivePerl 5.8.8.816 with SA 3.1.1 on Windows Server 2003.
> My SpamAssassin won't lint... Ugh.
>
> "EADDRINUSE" is not exported by the Errno module
> Can't continue after import errors at
> C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm line 45
> BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at
> C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm line 45.
> Compilation failed in require at C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin.pm
> line 75.
> BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at
> C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin.pm line 75.
> Compilation failed in require at spamassassin line 78.
> BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at spamassassin line 78.
>
>
> It doesn't have the same problem on Windows XP... Wonder what the
> difference is? I used the same install procedure on both. The funny part
> is that the module interface still works fine and it's running correctly
> under CGPSA, so it works, but doesn't --lint. Go figure. I'll do some
> more digging. Anyone else have an idea where to look?
>
> Bret
>
>
>
>
Re: Any windows users try the new Active Perl with SA?
Posted by Duane Hill <d....@yournetplus.com>.
On Tuesday, March 14, 2006 at 8:43:13 PM, sa-user@onlinecol.com confabulated:
> Hi,
> I am wondering if anyone running Windows and SA has tried the new
> ActivePerl with 3.1.1?
Been using 5.8.7.815 with 3.1 since 815 first came out. Haven't had
any issues thus far. I'm probably going to upgrade to 3.1.1 over this
coming weekend.
--
"This message is made of 100% recycled electrons."
RE: Any windows users try the new Active Perl with SA?
Posted by Bret Miller <br...@wcg.org>.
> I am wondering if anyone running Windows and SA has tried the new
> ActivePerl with 3.1.1?
SA 3.11 lints fine on Windows XP with ActivePerl 5.8.8.816. The only
thing that concerns me about this build is how the CGPSA integration
tool will handle the change in line endings, \r\n now on Windows instead
of just \n.
Bret
RE: Any windows users try the new Active Perl with SA?
Posted by Bret Miller <br...@wcg.org>.
> > I am wondering if anyone running Windows and SA has tried the new
> > ActivePerl with 3.1.1?
>
> Now running ActivePerl 5.8.8.816 with SA 3.1.1 on Windows
> Server 2003. My SpamAssassin won't lint... Ugh.
>
> "EADDRINUSE" is not exported by the Errno module
> Can't continue after import errors at
> C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm line 45
> BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at
> C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm line 45.
> Compilation failed in require at C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin.pm
> line 75.
> BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at
> C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin.pm line 75. Compilation
> failed in require at spamassassin line 78. BEGIN
> failed--compilation aborted at spamassassin line 78.
>
>
> It doesn't have the same problem on Windows XP... Wonder what
> the difference is? I used the same install procedure on both.
> The funny part is that the module interface still works fine
> and it's running correctly under CGPSA, so it works, but
> doesn't --lint. Go figure. I'll do some more digging. Anyone
> else have an idea where to look?
OK... I found it. ActivePerl's nice PPM install utility found ERRNO as a
dependency to Mail-IMAPClient, which I use for bayes learning. I removed
Mail-IMAPClient and ERRNO and SpamAssassin would then --lint correctly.
Then I manually downloaded and installed Mail-IMAPClient, which then
found the built-in ERRNO function and everything is happy. :)
So, if you're using ActivePerl 5.8.8.816, then don't ppm install
Mail-IMAPClient or it will break SA. Time to update the wiki...
Bret
RE: Any windows users try the new Active Perl with SA?
Posted by Bret Miller <br...@wcg.org>.
> I am wondering if anyone running Windows and SA has tried the new
> ActivePerl with 3.1.1?
Now running ActivePerl 5.8.8.816 with SA 3.1.1 on Windows Server 2003.
My SpamAssassin won't lint... Ugh.
"EADDRINUSE" is not exported by the Errno module
Can't continue after import errors at
C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm line 45
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at
C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/DnsResolver.pm line 45.
Compilation failed in require at C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin.pm
line 75.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at
C:\Perl\site\lib/Mail/SpamAssassin.pm line 75.
Compilation failed in require at spamassassin line 78.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at spamassassin line 78.
It doesn't have the same problem on Windows XP... Wonder what the
difference is? I used the same install procedure on both. The funny part
is that the module interface still works fine and it's running correctly
under CGPSA, so it works, but doesn't --lint. Go figure. I'll do some
more digging. Anyone else have an idea where to look?
Bret
RE: Any windows users try the new Active Perl with SA?
Posted by Bret Miller <br...@wcg.org>.
> I am wondering if anyone running Windows and SA has tried the new
> ActivePerl with 3.1.1?
Figures... I just checked the version the other day and (finally)
upgraded to the 815 version. Guess I'll re-do it today and try the next
one.
Bret
Any windows users try the new Active Perl with SA?
Posted by "sa-user@onlinecol.com" <sa...@onlinecol.com>.
Hi,
I am wondering if anyone running Windows and SA has tried the new
ActivePerl with 3.1.1?