The future is here, but Spamassassin doesn't buy it
Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I am getting a number of incoming emails flagged as spam this morning.
> Here's why:
>
> X-Spam-Level: *****
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.2 required=5.0 tests=FH_DATE_PAST_20XX,
> SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=3.2.5
> X-Spam-Report:
> * 3.4 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX The date is grossly in the future.
>
> The date of 2010 in the emails is correct. I have typed "sa-update" and
> restarted, to no avail. Anyone else seeing this?
Yes and they haven't fixed it (yet) :
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6269
Change your score for that rule, or disable it, or change it like
described in the bug entry
I like the fact that they said it was "fixed" in svn some months ago,
but it's still in svn and not in the $current release so ... :/
Nothing than a sa-update will not fix when they decide to update the
base rules
--
--
Fabian Arrotin
test -e /dev/human/brain || ( echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/sysrq ; echo c >
/proc/sysrq-trigger )
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
01-01-2010, 07:29 PM
Gilbert Sebenste
The future is here, but Spamassassin doesn't buy it
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I am getting a number of incoming emails flagged as spam this morning.
> Here's why:
>
> X-Spam-Level: *****
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.2 required=5.0 tests=FH_DATE_PAST_20XX,
> SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=3.2.5
> X-Spam-Report:
> * 3.4 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX The date is grossly in the future.
>
> The date of 2010 in the emails is correct. I have typed "sa-update" and
> restarted, to no avail. Anyone else seeing this?
Yep, it's universal. They caught this 5 months ago then never pushed the
update.
The future is here, but Spamassassin doesn't buy it
Gilbert Sebenste wrote on Fri, 1 Jan 2010 13:52:03 -0600 (CST):
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.2 required=5.0 tests=FH_DATE_PAST_20XX,
> SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=3.2.5
> X-Spam-Report:
> * 3.4 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX The date is grossly in the future.
add
score FH_DATE_PAST_20XX 0
to your /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
And you should use Bayes. A well-trained Bayes would have balanced that
down (assuming it was ham).
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
01-01-2010, 08:17 PM
Fabian Arrotin
The future is here, but Spamassassin doesn't buy it
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Gilbert Sebenste wrote on Fri, 1 Jan 2010 13:52:03 -0600 (CST):
>
>> X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.2 required=5.0 tests=FH_DATE_PAST_20XX,
>> SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=3.2.5
>> X-Spam-Report:
>> * 3.4 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX The date is grossly in the future.
>
> add
>
> score FH_DATE_PAST_20XX 0
>
> to your /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
> And you should use Bayes. A well-trained Bayes would have balanced that
> down (assuming it was ham).
>
> Kai
*nod* : my spamassasin machine didn't block any mail today (except
real spam) thanks to bayes. The FH_DATE_PAST_20XX scored up but bayes
scored down on the other hand so no False Positive here ;-)
--
--
Fabian Arrotin
test -e /dev/human/brain || ( echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/sysrq ; echo c >
/proc/sysrq-trigger )
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
The future is here, but Spamassassin doesn't buy it
