cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

spam...spam...spam...

decomplexity
Rising Star
Posts: 489
Thanks: 25
Registered: 30-07-2007

spam...spam...spam...

Has anyone else found [-SPAM-] marking going a bit awry? I received an email this morning with:

X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.4 (2006-07-25) on pih-sunmxcore13
X-Spam-Filtering-Done: yes
X-Daemon-Classification: INNOCENT

(blah blah..)

X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent
X-DSPAM-Processed: Fri Mar 2 07:16:08 2007
X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.6969
X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 231 chance of being spam
X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000
X-DSPAM-Factors: 27,

which was nevertheless marked [-SPAM-] !
Zen from May 17. PN Business account from 2004 - 2017
5 REPLIES
Superuser
Superuser
Posts: 2,484
Thanks: 190
Fixes: 5
Registered: 06-04-2007

spam...spam...spam...

Is there anything else in the header that might say it is spam? From memory PlusNet use a few different spam detection techniques and I'd guess if anyone of the thinks its spam then it would be marked as such, even though the 2 you have shown say its innocent.

Phil
Liam
Grafter
Posts: 2,083
Registered: 04-04-2007

spam...spam...spam...

Any chance you could PM bobpullen the full headers?
Liam
Grafter
Posts: 2,083
Registered: 04-04-2007

spam...spam...spam...

By the way, is it actually Spam?
Community Gaffer
Community Gaffer
Posts: 12,799
Thanks: 630
Fixes: 62
Registered: 04-04-2007

spam...spam...spam...

Hi there,

I have a suspicion I know what's causing this but won't be able to confirm until Monday.

We have recently begun using a third spam detection engine in addition to Spamasassin and dSpam (Clam I think). Last week I saw a number of examples where the X-Clam-Spam header was malforming emails. This resulted in the first part of the body of an email being the last few lines of the message header.

To see if it was Clam causing the problem I think we disabled the X header.

It could well be that the mail is passing through Spamasassin and dSpam without being marked and then being picked up by Clam. Because there's no header advising of this it is creating the impression that the email's being incorrectly tagged.

I shall chase this early next week.

Kind Rgds,

Bob Pullen
Plusnet Products Team
If I've been helpful then please give thanks ⤵

Community Gaffer
Community Gaffer
Posts: 12,799
Thanks: 630
Fixes: 62
Registered: 04-04-2007

Re: spam...spam...spam...

Quote
Has anyone else found [-SPAM-] marking going a bit awry? I received an email this morning with:

X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.4 (2006-07-25) on pih-sunmxcore13
X-Spam-Filtering-Done: yes
X-Daemon-Classification: INNOCENT

(blah blah..)

X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent
X-DSPAM-Processed: Fri Mar 2 07:16:08 2007
X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.6969
X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 231 chance of being spam
X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000
X-DSPAM-Factors: 27,

which was nevertheless marked [-SPAM-] !


OK, I've had the chance to look into this in a bit more detail now. There's nothing wrong with these headers. The email went through dSpam which marked it as innocent and the email was then identified as SPAM by Spamasassin.

People are getting confused due to the fact that dSpam isn't identifying the mail as spam. It is however being marked as such by another system.

Kind Rgds,

Bob Pullen
Plusnet Products Team
If I've been helpful then please give thanks ⤵