Richard,<br><br>You're right - it did hit the cache! I totally missed that. Spam actions are to store, both spam and high scoring spam.<br><br>But still, it passes it through SA:<br><br>RBL checks: m18CFjRV010282 found in SBL+XBL <br>
Feb 8 07:31:56 MailScanner[16681]: Message m18CFjRV010282 from <a href="http://220.70.102.23">220.70.102.23</a> (<a href="mailto:volunteereda6@tahitiantreasure.com">volunteereda6@tahitiantreasure.com</a>) to <a href="http://severnsidefabrics.co.uk">severnsidefabrics.co.uk</a> is spam, SBL+XBL, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=27.932, required 5, autolearn=disabled, OUTLOOK_3416 1.70, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 0.50, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 1.50, RAZOR2_CHECK 0.50, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET 2.19, RCVD_IN_XBL 2.90, RDNS_NONE 0.10, TVD_SPACE_RATIO 2.90, URIBL_AB_SURBL 1.61, URIBL_BLACK 1.96, URIBL_JP_SURBL 2.86, URIBL_OB_SURBL 2.13, URIBL_SBL 2.47, URIBL_SC_SURBL 2.52, URIBL_WS_SURBL 2.10) <br>
<br>That one was not cached, same result...<br><br>-Vlad<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 2/7/08, <b class="gmail_sendername">Richard Frovarp</b> <<a href="mailto:Richard.Frovarp@sendit.nodak.edu">Richard.Frovarp@sendit.nodak.edu</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Vlad Mazek wrote:<br>> Nope, still gets processed by MailScanner:<br>><br>> Feb 7 17:18:45 MailScanner[18224]: RBL checks: m17M9lxS016045 found<br>> in SBL+XBL<br>> Feb 7 17:18:46 inbound42 MailScanner[18224]: SpamAssassin cache hit<br>
> for message m17M9lxS016045<br>> Feb 7 17:18:46 MailScanner[18224]: Message m17M9lxS016045 from<br>> *MailScanner warning: numerical links are often malicious:*<br>> <a href="http://75.63.44.11">75.63.44.11</a> <<a href="http://75.63.44.11">http://75.63.44.11</a>> (<a href="mailto:ka@creativeholidays.com.au">ka@creativeholidays.com.au</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:ka@creativeholidays.com.au">ka@creativeholidays.com.au</a>>) to <a href="http://rmel.org">rmel.org</a> <<a href="http://rmel.org">http://rmel.org</a>> is<br>> spam, SBL+XBL, SpamAssassin (cached, score=23.378, required 5,<br>
> autolearn=disabled, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 0.50,<br>> RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 1.50, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 1.50,<br>> RAZOR2_CHECK 0.50, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET 2.19, RCVD_IN_XBL 2.90,<br>> STOX_REPLY_TYPE 0.00, TVD_FINGER_02 2.72, URIBL_BLACK 1.96,<br>
> URIBL_JP_SURBL 2.86, URIBL_OB_SURBL 2.13, URIBL_SC_SURBL 2.52,<br>> URIBL_WS_SURBL 2.10)<br>><br>> Notice that it still passes it through SpamAssassin.<br>><br>> I have the the following in my MailScanner.conf:<br>
><br>> Spam List = SBL+XBL<br>> Spam Lists To Be Spam = 1<br>> Spam Lists To Reach High Score = 1<br>><br>> -Vlad<br><br>Actually, that one didn't get passed through SpamAssassin. It hit the<br>cache. Not sure how that is handled differently. What version of<br>
MailScanner? What are your High Scoring Spam Actions?<br>--<br>MailScanner mailing list<br><a href="mailto:mailscanner@lists.mailscanner.info">mailscanner@lists.mailscanner.info</a><br><a href="http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner">http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner</a><br>
<br>Before posting, read <a href="http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting">http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting</a><br><br>Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all">
<br>-- <br><br>-Vlad