guenther at rudersport
Oct 14, 2009, 7:35 PM
Post #3 of 7
(696 views)
Permalink
|
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 19:54 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 14-Oct-2009, at 19:40, MySQL Student wrote:
> > Which rule(s) is then incorrect? What is the right solution here? Is
> > the only option to whitelist the user?
> your spam test were:
>
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=6.1 tag1=-300.0 tag2=5.0 kill=5.0
> use_bayes=1 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, EXTRA_MPART_TYPE,FREEMAIL_FROM,
> HTML_MESSAGE, L_UNVERIFIED_GMAIL, PART_CID_STOCK, RELAYCOUNTRY_HIGH,
> RELAYCOUNTRY_US, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TVD_FW_GRAPHIC_NAME_LONG,
> T_TVD_FW_GRAPHIC_ID1
>
> there's a couple of things here.
> I'm not sure which of those scored what. [...]
Seconded. I do see quite a few custom rules. How much did they score?
Even more strange, there is a T_ prefixed rule, which of course is not
stock. And generally used for NON-published rules still in evaluation.
How did that one end up in there? What does it score?
No full report headers, no scores. Nothing we can possibly say.
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu\0.@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
|
