Spam/Ham training under Outlook/Thunderbird/etc.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by charlesr

We current have a system where a user drags their spam messages into 'Junk' and a cron job every hour reads the changed mail folders and updates the spam databases for each user.

Dragging mail to the Junk folder does NOT get it trained as spam by ZImbra, you need to hit the Junk button for it to perform the correct action of moving it to the Spam Training folder.

Originally Posted by charlesr

Has any one come up with a solution that would make this work?

The solution, at the moment, is to forward the spam email to the Spam Training account as an attachment.

[dwmtractor]

Go to bugzilla and add your votes to bug 9532. The more votes, the higher priority it'll get as a future enhancement.

[mmorse]

Seems he saw it yesterday:

------- Additional Comment #21 From Charles Rumford 2007-10-29 20:11 PST -------
Is this something that was put into the newest version of Zimbra? Because it would be grand if this worked like this.

The answer is that it hasn't been planned for the initial 5.0 in PMweb, but with 58 votes you can be assured that it'll be looked at for the next round (it's assigned to someone as well). I'll bet it gets targeted for 5.5

[chuckm]

I have just upgraded one of the Zimbra servers here from 4.5.5 to the latest 5.0.5 release (on CentOS-5). It went smooth as silk, kept all the settings and extras that were important, and "just worked" when brought on-line. Nice!

One thing that hasn't been addressed as far as I can determine is the ability of zmtrainsa (and therefore zmspamextract) to cause a message to be marked as read after it reads it from a non-standard spam folder that each user has (we don't use the Junk folder).

Is there an option that can be passed to the Java code via zmspamextract that will cause it to mark a message as read? On the 4.x system I could tweak the fetchmail options to do this, but the 5.x system doesn't use fetchmail any more.

Any handy workaround suggestions would be most welcome.

[dwmtractor]

Originally Posted by chuckm

but the 5.x system doesn't use fetchmail any more.

Not for the default method of adding external accounts, but there's no reason you can't use fetchmail if you prefer. I had it set up for pulling a lot of mail from external accounts onto various Zimbra accounts and I was too lazy to change it all. It's still working fine.

Practically speaking, I don't think 4.x used fetchmail either, but you had then, and still have, the option of using fetchmail WITH either 4.x or 5.x Zimbra.

[chuckm]

Hmmmm ... interesting.

I found somewhere in another thread that at 5.x the code was changed to not use fetchmail but to use zmspamextract instead. That was when it changed to being able to reach into any account without requiring the user's password as a parameter to zmtrainsa. AFAIK 4.0.x used fetchmail by default, which required the password parameter.

I suppose I could replace the 5.x version of zmtrainsa itself with the older version, but I'd rather not revert to passing in passwords or bump into an incompatibility somewhere.

[dwmtractor]

Originally Posted by chuckm

Hmmmm ... interesting.

I found somewhere in another thread that at 5.x the code was changed to not use fetchmail but to use zmspamextract instead. That was when it changed to being able to reach into any account without requiring the user's password as a parameter to zmtrainsa. AFAIK 4.0.x used fetchmail by default, which required the password parameter.

I suppose I could replace the 5.x version of zmtrainsa itself with the older version, but I'd rather not revert to passing in passwords or bump into an incompatibility somewhere.

I'm not sure what you mean here. I used zmtrainsa at the command line in Zimbra 4.5.7 long before 5.x came out, and I certainly didn't need the user's password to do it. Did you go straight from 4.0.x to 5.0.x? Because the whole 4.5 series already had this capability.

The point I'm making is that fetchmail is still useable. If zmtrainsa used fetchmail or not is not something I knew and/or can comment on.

[chuckm]

Originally Posted by dwmtractor

....... Did you go straight from 4.0.x to 5.0.x? Because the whole 4.5 series already had this capability.

I think that may be the answer. I went straight from 4.0.x to 5.0.x on this particular server, and from 4.0.x to 4.5.7 on another. I first noticed the switch away from requiring passwords at 4.5.7, but didn't dig into it because of time constraints. I looked at the 4.5.7 system just now and it does indeed use zmspamextract instead of fetchmail. That change explains why passwords are not needed at that revision, since it's only fetchmail that requires them.

Now, if there were only a way to get the new zmspamextract training process to mark the messages as 'read'.