 |
 |
And for the record, I see that my own post to MSUNAG about "possible spam" messages also got labelled as "possible spam". So it goes. -- dkm At 12/22/2008 02:21 PM Monday, David McFarlane wrote: >OK, what's going on? First a post from Victor Lounds, and then one >from Lee Duynslager labelled as "possible spam" (see copied header >below), and I suspect this is just the beginning. Did we change >something to the campus spam filter to create a bunch of false >positves, or do we just have a rash of users coincidentaly sending >messages that look like spam? > >Thanks, >-- dkm > > >At 12/22/2008 01:59 PM Monday, Lee Duynslager wrote: >>X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system >>"mx56.mail.msu.edu", has >> identified this incoming email as possible spam. The >> original message >> has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't >> spam) or label >> similar future email. If you have any questions, see >> [log in to unmask] for details. >> Content preview: I've already called the helpdesk about >> this. Does anybody >> know the maximum attachment size for the new MSU >> webmail? From what the attachment >> upload screen shows it is 2mb. Is that a mistake, because >> before our users >> could send 10mb of attachments right? [...] >> Content analysis details: (-1.0 points, 5.0 required) >> pts rule name description >> ---- ---------------------- >> -------------------------------------------------- >> -1.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at >> http://www.dnswl.org/, low >> trust >> [35.8.2.205 listed in list.dnswl.org] >> 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message