j’aimerai vérifier avec vous la bonne mise en place que m’a GW email surtout au niveau de l’apprentissage bayesien! voila le mikmak
ma passerelle email vat chercher dans un dossier spam les emails du meme nom ainsi de des non spam!
en suite je lui donne tout ça a manger. mais malheureusement je n’ai jamais vu passer un email taggué en spam grasse a mon bayesien chérie voici mon script. merci pour vos retours
echo -e "## backup de la base bayes $PATH_BACKUP$NOM_BACKUP"
chown -R amavis:amavis $PATH_BACKUP
su amavis -c ‘sa-learn --backup’ > $PATH_BACKUP$NOM_BACKUP
Copie des emails en local
echo -e "## copie des spams"
scp -v root@srv_mail:/home/vbox/mon.domaine/spam/.spam/cur/* $PATH_SPAM
echo -e "## copie des nospams"
scp -v root@srv_mail:/home/vbox/mon.domaine/spam/.nospam/cur/* $PATH_NOSPAM
Return-Path: dev_null_sample_spam@example.com
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on srv.mondomaine.fr
X-Spam-Level: ********
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=8.6 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_12_24,
DNS_FROM_RFC_DSN,INVALID_DATE,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no version=3.2.5
X-Spam-Report: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?
* 1.7 INVALID_DATE L'en-t=eate Date: est incorrect (il contient AM/PM)
* 2.5 DNS_FROM_RFC_DSN RBL: Envelope sender in dsn.rfc-ignorant.org
* 1.8 DATE_IN_PAST_12_24 Date: est 12 =e0 24 heures avant la date de
* l'en-t=eate Received:
* 2.6 INVALID_MSGID Le Message-ID est invalide, selon la RFC-2822?=
Delivery-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:36:25 +0000
Return-Path: <dev_null_sample_spam@example.com>
Delivered-To: dev_null_sample_spam@netnoteinc.com
Received: from dogma.slashnull.org (dogma.slashnull.org [212.17.35.15])
by mail.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F138F114121
for <dev_null_sample_spam@netnoteinc.com>; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:36:21 +0000 (Eire)
Received: (from dev_null_sample_spam@localhost)
by dogma.slashnull.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA17343
for dev_null_sample_spam@netnoteinc.com; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:36:21 GMT
Received: from XeNT.ics.uci.edu (xent.ics.uci.edu [128.195.21.213])
by dogma.slashnull.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA17336
for <dev_null_sample_spam@jmason.org>; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:36:16 GMT
From: xl6Ety00V@fismat1.fcfm.buap.mx
Received: from blue.mydomain.com (blue.mydomain.com [208.184.130.52])
by XeNT.ics.uci.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id EAA16254
for <fork@xent.ics.uci.edu>; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 04:38:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ns.fundch.cl (unknown [200.28.105.254])
by blue.mydomain.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C32333424F
for <fork@xent.com>; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 20:33:02 -0500 (EST)
X-Antispam: rblchk: (RSS) 3 Relayed through blacklisted site 200.28.105.254
Received: from y068k3017 [63.10.249.142] by ns.fundch.cl
(SMTPD32-6.00) id A92614DC012A; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 22:21:26 -0400
DATE: 21 Jan 01 8:24:27 PM
Message-ID: <N1msdrbJXNPfV4wg9>
Subject: /!\ SPAM /!\ Home Based Business for Grownups
To: undisclosed-recipients: ;
Sender: dev_null_sample_spam@example.com
X-Spam-Prev-Subject: Home Based Business for Grownups
alors doc?
[edit: J’ai viré le nom de Chloë et l’adresse email récupérable]
Le deuxième porte bien un drapeau «X-Spam-Flag: YES», c’est donc au niveau du traitement de ce drapeau que ça coince dans ta chaine de traitement. Les règles bayésiennes fonctionnent
voici mon script. merci pour vos retours