Re: mail bypass spamassassin

2002-04-11 Thread christophe barbé
Ok that is it. I have increased the limit size of spamc (with -s) and the message got a nice : X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=16.3 required=5.0 tests=FROM_MALFORMED,FROM_NO_USER,BADTRANS_WORM,MISSING_HEADERS version=2.11 Christophe -- Christophe Barbé <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GnuPG FingerPrint: E0F6 F

Re: mail bypass spamassassin

2002-04-11 Thread christophe barbé
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 08:07:10PM -0400, Duncan Findlay wrote: > On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 06:52:10PM -0400, christophe barbé wrote: > > I got a mail with sample.exe (2.4MB) attachment. This mail has not been > > scanned by spamassassin. I don't understand why. I use a procmail rule > > as below : >

Re: mail bypass spamassassin

2002-04-11 Thread Duncan Findlay
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 06:52:10PM -0400, christophe barbé wrote: > I got a mail with sample.exe (2.4MB) attachment. This mail has not been > scanned by spamassassin. I don't understand why. I use a procmail rule > as below : spamassassin, by default, does not check messages larger than 250k. Mess

Re: mail bypass spamassassin

2002-04-11 Thread Colin Watson
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 06:52:10PM -0400, christophe barbé wrote: > I got a mail with sample.exe (2.4MB) attachment. This mail has not been > scanned by spamassassin. I don't understand why. I use a procmail rule > as below : > > # SPAMASSASSIN > :0fw > | spamc -f Could it be that spamd

mail bypass spamassassin

2002-04-11 Thread christophe barbé
I got a mail with sample.exe (2.4MB) attachment. This mail has not been scanned by spamassassin. I don't understand why. I use a procmail rule as below : # SPAMASSASSIN :0fw | spamc -f :0e { EXITCODE=$? } :0: * ^X-Spam-Flag: YES junk # End of SPAMASSASSIN section And t