Mailing-List: contact users-help@spamassassin.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Subject: Re: Odd results when using whitelisting
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
References: <027250b8-3057-a736-9149-df1261ac0799@howitts.co.uk>
 <c015707e-735e-6594-46f5-89b197662316@thelounge.net>
 <0b66da4b-16b1-a911-d1bc-eff884db8d3b@howitts.co.uk>
 <d32608a8-e83d-1c86-5938-63ba7f9d8777@thelounge.net>
 <2c089f53-ce61-ce7e-68af-9e45ed2ec7d7@howitts.co.uk>
 <83da2c53-f907-b141-efd3-e5c210c725f3@thelounge.net>
 <1833143d-b1a7-78e6-b389-6b207df1e292@howitts.co.uk>
 <4dd9177c-66d9-f274-79f6-2d7c08d88cba@thelounge.net>
 <40966baf-dd7e-869f-98e0-07d389e95a0f@howitts.co.uk>
 <0ee642fd-3260-dfcd-015e-c72890455581@thelounge.net>
 <b0d23c0c-dc2f-65f0-ab71-507b66b5cdc7@howitts.co.uk>
 <f257593e-232c-9406-be85-25e02b024dff@howitts.co.uk>
From: Bowie Bailey <Bowie_Bailey@BUC.com>
Message-ID: <5ea133e4-f47e-8dfa-84dd-1391a7edc854@BUC.com>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 11:17:54 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f257593e-232c-9406-be85-25e02b024dff@howitts.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
archived-at: Tue, 31 May 2016 15:18:10 -0000

On 5/30/2016 10:35 AM, Nick Howitt wrote:
> Just for a bit of closure, it looks like when you use amavisd-new with 
> SA, it is amavisd-new and not SA which is adding the X-Spam headers. 
> In /etc/amavisd/api.conf there is a parameter, $sa_tag_level_deflt, 
> defaulted to -99, below which no X-Spam headers are set. If you 
> whitelist, you start at -100. So, if the rest of the tests total to 
> less than 1, you will not get an X-Spam header. This can be confirmed 
> by playing around with this parameter and by upping the amavisd log 
> level so you can see the results of all the spam tests for each e-mail 
> even if it does not get the X-Spam headers.

Amavisd-new only uses SA to generate a score for the message.  It has 
it's own settings for tagging and rejection thresholds, writes its own 
headers, and can mark a message as spam/ham or reject it based on its 
own whitelists, blacklists, and many other settings.

The bottom line is this: If you have a problem with the actual score 
being generated, look at SA.  If you have a problem with the header 
markup or with messages being rejected or let through without scanning, 
look at Amavisd.

-- 
Bowie