Spam blacklist?

[Remco Barendse]

It's not really a problem, I just created another rule under low scoring
spam actions where I put the same stuff as the spam blacklist rule.

This  does the job although if the blacklisted stuff would be treated as high
scoring it would save an extra rule file. :)

On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Julian Field wrote:

> At 21:24 08/01/2003, you wrote:
> >Indeed, that is one possible solution.
> >
> >But not all of my boxes run spamassassin, particularly RedHat 6.2 is very
> >difficult to get SA properly installed. Lots of things to upgrade and 90%
> >of the spam problem is from or to a limited set of e-mail adresses on my
> >boxes.
> >
> >But one would think that a blacklisted mail adress would be processed
> >according to high scoring rules, otherwise there isn't much use in
> >blacklisting them :)
>
> My black/white-listing isn't really connected to the SpamAssassin scoring
> code. Maybe it should be.
>
>
>
> >On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Lewis Bergman wrote:
> >
> > > On Wednesday 08 January 2003 04:24 am, Remco Barendse wrote:
> > > > I have a rule list that will mark certain messages as spam even though
> > > > there is no other reason to mark them as spam. This is working perfectly.
> > > >
> > > > I have noticed however that MailScanner will treat messages that are
> > > > marked by a blacklist rule as low scoring spam?
> > > >
> > > > Would it be possible to change this to high scoring spam? After all you
> > > > want to blacklist them. I allow low scoring spam messages to go through
> > > > but high scoring stuff is forwarded to an alternate address. I would like
> > > > to do the same for the blacklisted stuff.
> > > Why not use SA to do the RBL checks and then assign them a score which will
> > > force them into the high score category using the spam.assassin.prefs.conf
> > > file?
> > > --
> > > Lewis Bergman
> > > Texas Communications
> > > 4309 Maple St.
> > > Abilene, TX 79602-8044
> > > 915-695-6962 ext 115
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >--
> >This message has been scanned for viruses and
> >dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> >believed to be clean.
>
> --
> Julian Field
> www.MailScanner.info
> MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support
>
>


--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.


.



This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses
***********************************************************************************



.



This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses
***********************************************************************************