Spamassassin Problem

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
#1 Thu, 06/19/2008 - 15:41
fchavez

Spamassassin Problem

i have been noticing that n my server i am receiving alot of spam. i looked at the headers of the messages and it doesn't say anywhere SPAM-X. i looked here on this site and it says that it could be a mis- configuration in spamassassin or procmail and not in postfix if i am correct. what are the default setting so i can possibly reset spamassassin because i issued a few commands to see if it was running at all and it is but it is just not scanning any mail it is just going straight trough to my mailboxes. i suspect that it may have something to do with the procmail spam delivery settings but i dont know. any help would be appreciated.

Mon, 06/23/2008 - 06:45
fchavez

I dont know if it helps. but i am running CentOS 4.6 . i have read in the big reports something about this but i dont understand exactly what there trying to do. could someone tell me if these kinds of problems would be fixed if i upgrade to cent os 5.1 ?

Mon, 06/23/2008 - 07:13 (Reply to #2)
andreychek

Hi there,

Can you verify that the anti-spam goodies are enabled?

Once you log into Virtualmin, click "System Settings" on the left, and choose "Features and Plugins".

You'll see "Spam filtering" mentioned there, along with a link to the right of that which shows you which domains Spam Filtering is enabled for.
-Eric

Mon, 06/23/2008 - 09:33
fchavez

thanks for the reply and i looked trough it and it is enabled for all domains. i have looked trough the raw source of the e-mail and the spam filter is not attaching the spam header.

<div class='quote'>Return-Path: &lt;fchavez09@siprep.org&gt;
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.9 (2007-02-13) on lazernetwork.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,
HTML_SHORT_COMMENT,MPART_ALT_DIFF autolearn=no version=3.1.9
X-Original-To: jenriquez@johnenriquez.com
Delivered-To: jenriquez@lazernetwork.com
Received: from mail.siprep.org (mail.siprep.org [67.155.105.52])
by lazernetwork.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FCE428822C
for &lt;jenriquez@johnenriquez.com&gt;; Mon, 23 Jun 2008 11:26:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=&quot;----_=_NextPart_001_01C8D55E.A017FEBC&quot;
Subject: test
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 11:26:16 -0700
Message-ID: &lt;22A517B1980D30449F1138ECB7678522029422B6@hermes.siprep.org&gt;
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: test
Thread-Index: AcjVXqAVdtctxek5TEu23sslV0Q+VA==
From: &quot;Francisco A. Chavez '09&quot; &lt;fchavez09@siprep.org&gt;
To: &lt;jenriquez@johnenriquez.com&gt;

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C8D55E.A017FEBC
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=&quot;iso-8859-1&quot;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

test test

------_=_NextPart_001_01C8D55E.A017FEBC
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=&quot;iso-8859-1&quot;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

&lt;!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC &quot;-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN&quot;&gt;
&lt;HTML&gt;
&lt;HEAD&gt;
&lt;META HTTP-EQUIV=3D&quot;Content-Type&quot; CONTENT=3D&quot;text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1&quot;&gt;
&lt;META NAME=3D&quot;Generator&quot; CONTENT=3D&quot;MS Exchange Server version =
6.5.7652.24&quot;&gt;
&lt;TITLE&gt;test&lt;/TITLE&gt;
&lt;/HEAD&gt;
&lt;BODY&gt;
&lt;!-- Converted from text/plain format --&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;

&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT SIZE=3D2&gt;test test&lt;/FONT&gt;
&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;/BODY&gt;
&lt;/HTML&gt;
------_=_NextPart_001_01C8D55E.A017FEBC--
</div>

i dont know if this helps but im just not getting the SPAM-X.

should i upgrade the os. im lost!

Mon, 06/23/2008 - 10:55 (Reply to #4)
andreychek

Well, first off, CentOS 4.6 is a supported distro, you definitely should not have to upgrade that, all the Virtualmin features should be available to you.

That said, check out the top of your email there, you'll see the following 3 lines:

X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.9 (2007-02-13) on lazernetwork.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_SHORT_COMMENT,MPART_ALT_DIFF autolearn=no version=3.1.9

I think it may have been X-Spam that you wanted to look for rather than Spam-X.

So I actually think SpamAssassin is alive and well on your server!
-Eric

Mon, 06/23/2008 - 10:55 (Reply to #5)
Joe
Joe's picture

<div class='quote'>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.9 (2007-02-13) on lazernetwork.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,
HTML_SHORT_COMMENT,MPART_ALT_DIFF autolearn=no version=3.1.9</div>

Those are the SpamAssassin headers. I'm not sure what &quot;SPAM-X&quot; headers are, but we wouldn't expect to see them from SpamAssassin. ;-)

A newer version of SpamAssassin (as found on CentOS 5) might be worthwhile, but the most useful feature (the autolearning white/black list) is disabled on your system...turning it on is probably a good start on solving your spam troubles.

You can do that in the SpamAssassin module in Webmin:Servers, click on &quot;Spam Classification&quot; and set the &quot;Use Bayesian learning classifier?&quot; option to &quot;Yes&quot;. This is the default in newer versions of SpamAssassin (maybe because it got better at avoiding false positives, or maybe just because the developers are more comfortable with Bayesian filtering now...I'm not sure). It is a bit more work for your server, but it can lead to dramatic improvements in filtering.

You can also use the &quot;Report spam&quot; button in Usermin to train SpamAssassin to know more about what your personal spam looks like. (It's also possible to train the system-wide spam filter, but that's somewhat dangerous, as bayesian filtering behaves in interesting ways that most humans don't grok--so it'd be very easy to train your systems filter to trash everyone's mail other than yours).

--

Check out the forum guidelines!

Mon, 06/23/2008 - 12:20
fchavez

wow i really appreciate that. i completely didn't realize that i was ok all along. i think the reason why i got all worried about it because when i tested it i was expecting it to be down closer to the message. I clearly over looked it. thank you for your responses.

Topic locked