Hey all,
I am getting a number of incoming emails flagged as spam this morning. Here's why:
X-Spam-Level: ***** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.2 required=5.0 tests=FH_DATE_PAST_20XX, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Report: * 3.4 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX The date is grossly in the future.
The date of 2010 in the emails is correct. I have typed "sa-update" and restarted, to no avail. Anyone else seeing this?
******************************************************************************* Gilbert Sebenste ******** (My opinions only!) ****** *******************************************************************************
Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
Hey all,
I am getting a number of incoming emails flagged as spam this morning. Here's why:
X-Spam-Level: ***** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.2 required=5.0 tests=FH_DATE_PAST_20XX, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Report: * 3.4 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX The date is grossly in the future.
The date of 2010 in the emails is correct. I have typed "sa-update" and restarted, to no avail. Anyone else seeing this?
Yes and they haven't fixed it (yet) : https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6269 Change your score for that rule, or disable it, or change it like described in the bug entry I like the fact that they said it was "fixed" in svn some months ago, but it's still in svn and not in the $current release so ... :/ Nothing than a sa-update will not fix when they decide to update the base rules
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
Hey all,
I am getting a number of incoming emails flagged as spam this morning. Here's why:
X-Spam-Level: ***** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.2 required=5.0 tests=FH_DATE_PAST_20XX, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Report: * 3.4 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX The date is grossly in the future.
The date of 2010 in the emails is correct. I have typed "sa-update" and restarted, to no avail. Anyone else seeing this?
Yep, it's universal. They caught this 5 months ago then never pushed the update.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6269
******************************************************************************* Gilbert Sebenste ******** (My opinions only!) ****** Staff Meteorologist, Northern Illinois University **** E-mail: sebenste@weather.admin.niu.edu *** web: http://weather.admin.niu.edu ** *******************************************************************************
Gilbert Sebenste wrote on Fri, 1 Jan 2010 13:52:03 -0600 (CST):
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.2 required=5.0 tests=FH_DATE_PAST_20XX, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Report: * 3.4 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX The date is grossly in the future.
add
score FH_DATE_PAST_20XX 0
to your /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf And you should use Bayes. A well-trained Bayes would have balanced that down (assuming it was ham).
Kai
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Gilbert Sebenste wrote on Fri, 1 Jan 2010 13:52:03 -0600 (CST):
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.2 required=5.0 tests=FH_DATE_PAST_20XX, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Report: * 3.4 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX The date is grossly in the future.
add
score FH_DATE_PAST_20XX 0
to your /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf And you should use Bayes. A well-trained Bayes would have balanced that down (assuming it was ham).
Kai
*nod* : my spamassasin machine didn't block any mail today (except real spam) thanks to bayes. The FH_DATE_PAST_20XX scored up but bayes scored down on the other hand so no False Positive here ;-)
-
Fabian Arrotin -
Gilbert Sebenste -
Kai Schaetzl