Spamassassin Under CentOS-6.3

Home » CentOS » Spamassassin Under CentOS-6.3
CentOS 2 Comments

spamassassin seems to have become more-or-less non-functional in use with KMail on my server. It appears to be running OK, but only catches about 20% of my spam.

I wonder if others have experienced this decline?

I suspect that sa-learn is not performing properly.
(I run sa-learn nightly on my spam, which is saved in ~/Maildir/.Spam/cur/ , through the default spamassassin installation.)

Eg I receive more or less identical spam many times without it being caught.

Also, about 35% of the spam that gets through is in foreign languates – Russian, Chinese, Arabic and Turkish –
and it would help if I could get rid of this. I read up about catching such email in spamassassin, but did not understand exactly what changes are required.

One difficultly I have is that there seem many places where one can make changes in spamassassin settings. Am I right in thinking that all such changes can be made in .spamassassin/user_prefs ?

What should I put in this file to change the score for eg
3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%

Any advice or suggestions gratefully received.

2 thoughts on - Spamassassin Under CentOS-6.3

  • If you have old rules and as far as spam evolves, that situation is “fair”

    No.

    – how old is the Spam to feed sa-learn with?
    – what weight do you give to bayesean detection?

    Those are local langages for some…

    Seems OK

    Advices:
    – SA can be asked to report the scores in one header: make it reports and analyze the scoring
    – SA has a mailingg list you could also trigger in order to help

  • > > Also, about 35% of the spam that gets through is in foreign
    > > languates – Russian, Chinese, Arabic and Turkish –
    >
    > Those are local langages for some…

    Unfortunately you don’t say what “…” stands for. If it stands for users, you are right.

    But Timothy’s statement is about a program. And it’s a matter of fact that the languages mentioned above had been neglected by programmers in the past. It was a stony way to get to UTF-8, for example, because too many programmers believed that ISO-8859 is sufficient for everyone.

    And Timothy only said what he observed with no discrimination in mind.

    Regards,
    Reinhard

LEAVE A COMMENT