Anti-Spam ?

[TrueBlue]

Hi!

We have Anti-Spam set to aggressive for all of our email accounts. We have received over 2,000 spam emails this month alone. Does this program work?

Thank you in advance.

 

[Stephen]

TrueBlue, can you paste a portion of the message source here, it should have a tag with the hits required and hits that particular email had.

 

[TrueBlue]

Hi!

I substituted our domain name with sample.net to reduce more spam.

Here is a sample message:

Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: (qmail 28234 invoked by uid 399); 19 Jan 2005 18:01:35 -0000
X-Virus-Scan: Scanned by clamdmail 0.15 on mail.m****here.biz (no viruses);
Wed, 19 Jan 2005 13:01:37 -0500
Received: from unknown (HELO 63.209.158.6) (218.150.222.199)
by unknown.level3.net with SMTP; 19 Jan 2005 18:01:35 -0000
Received: from wenet.net (adsl-9-115-92.mia.bellsouth.net [65.9.115.92]) by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.18 (built Jul 28 2003)) with ESMTP id <C47EECED0DFC4F@l-daemon> for [email protected]; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 19:46:20 +0200
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:55:20 +0300
From: From Switzerland <[email protected]>
Subject: Switzerland Pharmacy
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on mail.m****here.biz
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.0 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_NET_HELO,
RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO autolearn=no version=2.64

Any ideas?

 

[Stephen]

I will run this through the unix admin and seewhat we can find.

 

[SubSpace]

A threshold of 5.0 doesn't seem awfully agressive to me. I use a setting of 5.0 at home and that's pretty mild. Only obvious spam without too many typos gets marked and false positives are extremely rare even without whitelisting.

 

[TrueBlue]

Hi!

Has anyone tried Very Aggressive in the control panel?

Does it make a difference?

Thank you in advance.

 

[acer]

I switched to Very Aggressive and its working fine. No genuine emails are getting filtered except for some mailing lists which I added to my white-list

 

[TrueBlue]

Hi!

I changed all of our email accounts to very aggressive spam filtering. And 10 minutes later I just got another one.

Here is the header information:

Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: (qmail 27747 invoked by uid 399); 20 Jan 2005 17:18:42 -0000
X-Virus-Scan: Scanned by clamdmail 0.15 on mail.m****here.biz (no viruses);
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:18:44 -0500
Received: from unknown (HELO 63.209.158.6) (220.119.200.73)
by unknown.level3.net with SMTP; 20 Jan 2005 17:18:42 -0000
Received: from mousy.net999.com ([203.233.237.16])
by law.prontomail.com
(InterMail vK.4.04.00.00 457-327-640 license 1wh006fa3240o7cb2w4azy7703l2bbu4)
with ESMTP
id <[email protected]>
for <[email protected]>; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:05:05 +0100
Received: by maidenhair with Internet Mail Service (5.5.4852.16)
id <ZKZP6SS3>; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:09:05 -0200
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:08:05 +0100
From: "Robyn Vaughan" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Addicted tO GrOwth stOcks?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL47 (25)]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on mail.m****here.biz
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.0 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_NET_HELO,
RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO autolearn=no version=2.64

 

[Stephen]

Can you please send a ticket in and in the ticket explain that changing from agressive to very agressive does not change the spamassassin settings.

From looking at the paste, it seems both had hits required of 5.0, which I think could be the problem.