On X-Spam-Status, X-Spam-Flag, X-MailScanner-SpamCheck,
and other weirdness
MailScanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Fri Aug 14 20:47:08 IST 2009
On 14/08/2009 20:40, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
> Jules Field wrote:
>> MailScanner does not use any header generated by SpamAssassin. It
>> does not allow SpamAssassin to modify the message. It adds its own
>> headers, based on the spam status and report returned by
>> SpamAssassin. So you won't get the same headers you get from using
>> spamd or anything like that from your MTA. You will get the headers
>> that MailScanner adds based on the output of SpamAssassin (which is
>> basically a report and a spam score number).
> I thought that MailScanner used X-Spam-Status, which is also used
> by spamassassin but in a different way.
It will use any header you tell it to, it's totally customisable. You
can trivially tell it to use X-Spam-Status, just edit the
MailScanner.conf file and "service MailScanner reload".
>> Hope that helps explain it a bit.
>> On 14/08/2009 17:31, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
>>> This email does not sound like a question; it is more about
>>> weird thoughts that are haunting me. Expect then a lot of confusion
>>> because that is how I am feeling right now. I am just trying to
>>> figure out what is going on here.
>>> I have been using X-Spam-Status: as a trigger for my dovecot sieve
>>> script to move spam into a Spam folder. Playing around with it, I
>>> found something interesting (at least to me): If I create a proper
>>> spam email and add to its header something like this:
>>> X-Spam-Status: No (or maybe or spongebob for that matters)
>>> and then send the spam to your my server, Mailscanner will properly
>>> detect it as spam and then edit X-Spam-Status like this:
>>> X-Spam-Status: No, Yes
>>> I was going to include my sieve script but what I am trying to
>>> figure out is something else. In MailScanner.conf we have these two
>>> Spam Actions = deliver header "X-Spam-Status: Yes"
>>> Non Spam Actions = deliver header "X-Spam-Status: No"
>>> I thought that indicated that if there was a X-Spam-Status header in
>>> the mail, it would be wiped and replaced with ones of the
>>> X-Spam-Status headers shown above. Also, it seems that while
>>> spamassassin would do something like
>>> X-Spam-Status: spam, SpamAssassin (cached, score=9.645, required
>>> 4.7, BAYES_50 0.00, FH_HELO_ENDS_DOT 2.31, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK
>>> 3.12, HTML_MESSAGE 0.90, MSOE_MID_WRONG_CASE 0.82,
>>> RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 0.50, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 1.50,
>>> RAZOR2_CHECK 0.50)
>>> X-Spam-Flag: YES
>>> MailScanner does the same using its own header,
>>> X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: spam, SpamAssassin (cached, score=9.645,
>>> required 4.7, BAYES_50 0.00, FH_HELO_ENDS_DOT 2.31,
>>> FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK 3.12, HTML_MESSAGE 0.90, MSOE_MID_WRONG_CASE
>>> 0.82, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 0.50, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 1.50,
>>> RAZOR2_CHECK 0.50)
>>> X-Spam-Status: Yes
>>> So, MailScanner uses X-Spam-Status the same way spamassassin uses
Julian Field MEng CITP CEng
Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store
Need help customising MailScanner?
Need help fixing or optimising your systems?
Need help getting you started solving new requirements from your boss?
PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654
Follow me at twitter.com/JulesFM and twitter.com/MailScanner
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
More information about the MailScanner