[Mimedefang] Can I Use Spamassassin Score Instead of MIMEDefang Score?
Jason Granat
jason at akota.com
Wed Sep 10 16:17:13 EDT 2003
Hi, thanks for the reply. Something doesn't jive here. In my headers I
always wind up with 2 scores. I'll paste headers from a spam I just got
below. I do see that more tests are being run for the first score. I
am running the current versions of MD and SA (well, MD is 2.36, current
is 2.37). The thing that I now think may be the problem is the issue
you brought up about running multiple milters. I am running one
instance of spamass-milter which is what I originally used for SA.
Should I not be using this? Is there another milter to use?
Forgive me for being an idiot. I've been searching all the FAQ's,
man's, etc. that I can find and I am stumped. I don't mean to be a
bother to the list.
Thanks,
Jason
Headers:
X-Spam-Warning: SpamAssassin says this is SPAM
X-Spam-Score: 6.3 (******)
DATE_IN_FUTURE_03_06,HTML_70_80,HTML_FONT_BIG,HTML_FONT_COLOR_GRAY,HTML_FONT_COLOR_UNSAFE,HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_02,HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_ONLY,MISSING_MIMEOLE,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.3 required=5.0
tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE_03_06,HTML_20_30,HTML_FONT_BIG,
HTML_FONT_COLOR_GRAY,HTML_FONT_COLOR_UNSAFE,
HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_10,HTML_MESSAGE,MISSING_MIMEOLE,
MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME
version=2.55
X-Spam-Level: ****
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp)
Kelson Vibber wrote:
> At 11:08 AM 9/10/2003, Jason Granat wrote:
>
>> So I tried Chris Meyer's suggestion and also found a section in the
>> README.SPAMASSASSIN file about how to get MD to use SA. MD is
>> scoring higher now but still averages a few points lower than SA. Is
>> there any way to just force MD to use the SA score instead of it's
>> own score? SA's scores have been working so much better for so long.
>> That brings up another question, could the scoring be different due
>> to spam learned or does MD take that into account since it's told to
>> use SA?
>
>
> 1. MD *does* use the SA score. Always. It calls SA, SA gives it a
> score, and MD uses that. At the time MD runs, the only instance of SA
> that has looked at the message is the one MD calls, and that's where
> it gets the score. Unless you've got multiple milters set up, the
> stand-alone SpamAssassin doesn't even get the message until MIMEDefang
> is already done with it. There's no way to force MD to use something
> that doesn't exist.
>
> 2. Compare what tests get hit. Have MD log the value of $names or add
> it to a header. That way you can see if SA-by-itself called Razor but
> MD-calling-SA didn't, or if some RBLs didn't get tripped in some, etc.
>
> 3. If none of the network tests show up in the MD+SA scores, put
> $SALocalTestsOnly=0 in the beginning of your mimedefang-filter (and
> make sure you don't have $SALocalTestsOnly=1 later on)
>
> 4. If you're trying to use Bayes, remember that you can only use a
> single sitewide database. This will often be less effective than
> per-user Bayes databases, but better than running SA without Bayes at
> all. You'll need to configure SA to use a single database that the MD
> user can write to. Search the archives for more info on that.
>
> 5. Older versions of MD do not reconstruct the latest set of Received
> headers when passing the message to SA, so SA will miss some
> information. I forget what version fixed this, but it's probably best
> to grab the latest.
>
> The most important bits are #1 and #2. Until you can compare which
> tests are getting hit by each instance of SA, everything else is
> speculation.
>
>
> Kelson Vibber
> SpeedGate Communications <www.speed.net>
> _______________________________________________
> MIMEDefang mailing list
> MIMEDefang at lists.roaringpenguin.com
> http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
More information about the MIMEDefang
mailing list