How to manually test an email?

[Gareth]

You can download the chickenpox rules from. I forgot I hadn't added them
so I have just done so myself.
http://www.emtinc.net/includes/chickenpox.cf

1) Bayes does automatically learn but it only learns spam messages if
the spamassassin score is over 20. There are types of spam message which
may normally be caught as spam but dont get a score over 20 so unless
you manually train your bayes will not learn some types of spam message.
Personally I get users at work to move all missed spam into a shared
mailbox and then learn that regularly.

2) Personally I would let spamassassin do RBL checks aswell. If
Mailscanner has already done it then it will be in the cache anyway so
no performance hit. If there was a dns timeout then you might have an
answer when spamassassin does its check.
I have spamcop listed as a rbl on out postfix mta but for a few messages
the dns lookup times out and postfix lets it through only for
spamassassin to find it when it does rbl checks and give it a nice high
score.

On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 14:17, paul @ firespam wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 14:08 +0100, Gareth wrote:
> > This is what I got :-
> > ...<snip>
> 
> I have just upgraded my MailScanner + SpamAssassin to the latest
> versions and now get this:
> 
> Content analysis details:   (7.6 points, 5.0 required)
> 
>  pts rule name              description
> --------------------------------------------------
>  0.1 RDNS_NONE              Delivered to trusted network by a host with
> no rDNS
>  2.5 FRT_PRICE              BODY: ReplaceTags: Price
>  3.6 FRT_SYMBOL             BODY: ReplaceTags: Symbol
>  1.4 TVD_FUZZY_SYMBOL       BODY: TVD_FUZZY_SYMBOL
>  0.0 HS_INDEX_PARAM         URI: Link contains a common tracker pattern.
>  0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
> 
> Which is obviously much better and closer to your results although I
> still have a few questions...
> 
> 1) In order for my bayes database to work properly do I need to
> regularly manually train it? I was under the impression this was an
> automated process.
> 
> 2) Why are no RBL checks being reported on? I have setup spamassasin to
> skip RBL checks, but MailScanner is set to use a few RBLs. Does this
> mean that the RBLs are not being checked at all? 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -- 
> This message has been scanned for spam, viruses and phishing attempts by firespam.com