Re: Learning only on read emails?

Am 20.10.2015 um 00:30 schrieb Ryan Coleman: I actually get THOUSANDS of emails a day. Most of it is spam. And not caught by SA. And when it is put into the spam folder it is not learned sounds like you train the wrong bayes at all (a repeatly happening problem of newbies) and so better look

Re: Learning only on read emails?

Ryan Coleman wrote: > That’s more information than Dovecot gives for the structure, so that will > help. > > Do you happen to know what the other flags mean? http://cr.yp.to/proto/maildir.html My inotify setup posted earlier relies only on the 'S' flag and alphabetical ordering of flags.

Re: Learning only on read emails?

That’s more information than Dovecot gives for the structure, so that will help. Do you happen to know what the other flags mean? Examples I have: Tch Tad STad Sade Sadg RSad FRSadfi F I presume is flagged - that email (the last one) is definitely one I flagged in Apple Mail. The “fi” seems to

Re: Learning only on read emails?

> On Oct 19, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Bill Cole > wrote: > > On 19 Oct 2015, at 17:21, Ryan Coleman wrote: > >> Ok so it was established I don’t have a ham scan (correct). So how do I do >> it so that it only scans the read emails in a MAILDIR? > > Assuming your delivery and client access mechanism

Re: Learning only on read emails?

On 19 Oct 2015, at 17:21, Ryan Coleman wrote: Ok so it was established I don’t have a ham scan (correct). So how do I do it so that it only scans the read emails in a MAILDIR? Assuming your delivery and client access mechanisms (IMAP4/POP3/whatever) follow standard Maildir behavior & naming,

Re: Learning only on read emails?

Thanks, I’m going to read about it tonight. > On Oct 19, 2015, at 5:40 PM, Eric Wong wrote: > > Ryan Coleman wrote: >> Ok so it was established I don’t have a ham scan (correct). So how do >> I do it so that it only scans the read emails in a MAILDIR? > > Since 2008, I use inotify (via incrond

Re: Learning only on read emails?

Ryan Coleman wrote: > Ok so it was established I don’t have a ham scan (correct). So how do > I do it so that it only scans the read emails in a MAILDIR? Since 2008, I use inotify (via incrond) on Maildirs: http://mid.gmane.org/20140822083434.ga8...@dcvr.yhbt.net

Re: Learning only on read emails?

> On Oct 19, 2015, at 5:25 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > > Am 20.10.2015 um 00:17 schrieb Ryan Coleman: >>> On Oct 19, 2015, at 4:45 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >>> Am 19.10.2015 um 23:41 schrieb Ryan Coleman: Actually it makes absolute sense since I dump my spam into a folder to be

Re: Learning only on read emails?

Am 20.10.2015 um 00:17 schrieb Ryan Coleman: On Oct 19, 2015, at 4:45 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 19.10.2015 um 23:41 schrieb Ryan Coleman: Actually it makes absolute sense since I dump my spam into a folder to be scanned as spam and anything that is still in my inbox, and read, is indeed ha

Re: SpamAssassin Rules Regarding Abuse of New Top Level Domains

On 19 Oct 2015, at 15:22, Larry Goldman wrote: I found that much of the SPAM had a BAYES_00 score of -1.9, which was defeating the contribution of the other tests. A closer inspection of the raw source revealed invisible gibberish text which, I assume, is designed to thwart the default BAYES_0

Re: Learning only on read emails?

> On Oct 19, 2015, at 4:45 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 19.10.2015 um 23:41 schrieb Ryan Coleman: >> Actually it makes absolute sense since I dump my spam into a folder to be >> scanned as spam and anything that is still in my inbox, and read, is indeed >> ham. > > do what you want - everybod

Re: Learning only on read emails?

On 2015-10-19 14:41, Ryan Coleman wrote: Actually it makes absolute sense since I dump my spam into a folder to be scanned as spam and anything that is still in my inbox, and read, is indeed ham. I just have to re-investigate the ./new and ./cur folders to make sure they will operate how I wan

Re: Misbehaving HEADER_HOST_IN_BLACKLIST? And no SPF on SA list host?

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 13:26:09 -0600 Amir Caspi wrote: > On Oct 19, 2015, at 1:16 PM, RW wrote: > > > > IIWY I wouldn't try to rescore the blacklisted URIs. I'd create a > > separate list for the TLDs > > Why? It might avoid this issue but IMHO the second rule is a bug, Yes > so that's a band-

Re: Learning only on read emails?

Am 19.10.2015 um 23:41 schrieb Ryan Coleman: Actually it makes absolute sense since I dump my spam into a folder to be scanned as spam and anything that is still in my inbox, and read, is indeed ham. do what you want - everybody else on this world is selecting messages and not rely on a rea

Re: Learning only on read emails?

Actually it makes absolute sense since I dump my spam into a folder to be scanned as spam and anything that is still in my inbox, and read, is indeed ham. I just have to re-investigate the ./new and ./cur folders to make sure they will operate how I want. But if the email was delivered to my pho

Re: Learning only on read emails?

Am 19.10.2015 um 23:21 schrieb Ryan Coleman: Ok so it was established I don’t have a ham scan (correct). So how do I do it so that it only scans the read emails in a MAILDIR? that makes no sense train a spcific ham and a specific spam folder where you move messages you are sure how to clas

Learning only on read emails?

Ok so it was established I don’t have a ham scan (correct). So how do I do it so that it only scans the read emails in a MAILDIR? — Ryan

Re: SpamAssassin Rules Regarding Abuse of New Top Level Domains

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015, Larry Goldman wrote: I found that much of the SPAM had a BAYES_00 score of -1.9, which was defeating the contribution of the other tests. A closer inspection of the raw source revealed invisible gibberish text which, I assume, is designed to thwart the default BAYES_00 tes

Re: Misbehaving HEADER_HOST_IN_BLACKLIST? And no SPF on SA list host?

On Oct 19, 2015, at 1:16 PM, RW wrote: > > IIWY I wouldn't try to rescore the blacklisted URIs. I'd create a > separate list for the TLDs Why? It might avoid this issue but IMHO the second rule is a bug, so that's a band-aid rather than a solution. I don't want a 100-point poison pill in gener

Re: SpamAssassin Rules Regarding Abuse of New Top Level Domains

So, to reply to my own question: CPanel is well documented and is supported only via forum .

Re: Misbehaving HEADER_HOST_IN_BLACKLIST? And no SPF on SA list host?

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 12:07:04 -0600 Amir Caspi wrote: > Hi, > > I didn't realize this until now but it looks like, for at > least the last 6 months or so, a few emails from users@spamassassin > have been dropped into my spam folder due to what I perceive to be a > bug in the HEADER_HOST_IN_B

Re: newbie questions: sought, sa-learn, rule weights

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:57:43 -0700 frede...@ofb.net wrote: > I guess I need to use "spamc -L" rather than "sa-learn"? I tried > "spamc -L" but it seems rather slow, about two messages per second, > only slightly faster when the messages have already been seen. Is > "sa-learn" faster than "spamc -

Misbehaving HEADER_HOST_IN_BLACKLIST? And no SPF on SA list host?

Hi, I didn't realize this until now but it looks like, for at least the last 6 months or so, a few emails from users@spamassassin have been dropped into my spam folder due to what I perceive to be a bug in the HEADER_HOST_IN_BLACKLIST rule. Specifically, I've got some blacklist_uri_hos

Re: newbie questions: sought, sa-learn, rule weights

Hi Reindl, Thanks for your reply. I replied separately to John about my Bayes setup - you were right, wrong user. Thanks for the advice about whitelisting being unnecessary. I hope that getting the Bayesian part working will make my setup effective without this. Thanks, Frederick On Sun, Oct