Re: Spam despite spam header

[Adam Sjøgren]

Emanuel Berg <embe8573@student.uu.se> writes:

>> Well, some system running SpamAssassin inserted those, not the
>> spammers ;-)

> Of course, but it doesn't do much good if the headers are only
> inserted and that will be that, does it?

What else do you propose should(/suppose would) happen?

If the mailserver deleted the email, you would be quite angry in case it
misdetected non-spam as spam...

> You mean like this?

> (setq nnmail-split-methods
>       '(("spam" "^X-Spam-Flag: YES")
>         ("mail.misc" "") ))

I use fancy splitting, but yes, that looks about right comparing to the
documentation. The examples do not start with ^, so you may want to try
without it, if it doesn't work; see next paragraph.

You can test where an existing email would be split to by pressing B q
when looking at it.

And you can get Gnus to put it where the splitting rules say by pressing
B r.

> I hope I won't get them in a directory called "spam", now!

Why? Wouldn't the point be to separate them out from the non-spam email?
Where would you like them to go? Remember that spam classification isn't
perfect.

> I tested sending a mail to myself with "X-Spam-Flag: YES" as a header,
> but it was delivered to mail.misc, and the header had been removed.
> Perhaps SpamAssassin thought that wasn't spam, and I got overruled.

Yeah, otherwise spammers would just set "X-Spam-Flag: NO" - so usually
mail servers that run SpamAssassin will remove any of those headers,
before adding what the mail server itself thinks.


  Best regards,

    Adam

-- 
 "[...] but beyond that the Fry household had as much         Adam Sjøgren
  interest or understanding of sport as a potato has of  asjo@koldfront.dk
  Riemann's zeta function."