On 10/01/2017, 23:11, "Reindl Harald" wrote:
>
>
>Am 10.01.2017 um 23:09 schrieb Andrea:
>> On 10/01/2017, 23:01, "Reindl Harald" wrote:
>>> you setup a new server with 3.3.2 in 2017?
>>>
>>> current is 3.4.1 and i know people running it on Debian for more than a
>>> year - sorry but why are you
On 10/01/2017, 23:01, "Reindl Harald" wrote:
>
>Am 10.01.2017 um 22:42 schrieb Andrea:
>> Until last week our mail server had been running Debian Wheezy
>>(installed
>> circa 2014). Full support for that release was dropped last April so I
>> decided to take advantage of the lower traffic during
Hi all.
Until last week our mail server had been running Debian Wheezy (installed
circa 2014). Full support for that release was dropped last April so I
decided to take advantage of the lower traffic during the holidays and
upgrade to Jessie.
Since then the amount of spam getting though has incre
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Axb wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 04:49 PM, Michael B Allen wrote:
PS: Is it possible to see what values are associated with all tags for
debugging purposes? Meaning can I run a command that dumps a list of
all tags and their associated values so that
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Emin Akbulut wrote:
I've trained the SA and it worked for a while but now it's useless.
How can I prevent those spams? They look like poems
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I am a tender and passionate girl-student.
I assure satisfaction and all the pleasures to my lover!
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Marc Stürmer wrote:
Am 2017-01-09 22:30, schrieb L A Walsh:
I have:
bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam -5.0
bayes_auto_learn_threshold_spam 10.0
In order for autolearn to work you need at least 200 trained messages in the
ham and spam category. If the filter doesn't
On 01/10/2017 04:49 PM, Michael B Allen wrote:
PS: Is it possible to see what values are associated with all tags for
debugging purposes? Meaning can I run a command that dumps a list of
all tags and their associated values so that I can decide which tags
could have their scores adjusted?
You c
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
>
>
> On 10-01-17 07:07, Michael B Allen wrote:
>> If I understand correctly, the BAYES_X tags add a value corresponding
>> to the X value. So BAYES_99 is basically adding 0.99 to the spam
>> score?
>
> This is incorrect. The number in the tag o
>> PS: Is it possible to see what values are associated with all tags for
>> debugging purposes? Meaning can I run a command that dumps a list of
>> all tags and their associated values so that I can decide which tags
>> could have their scores adjusted?
>
> You can grep for the scores in /var/lib/
>> PS2: Is there a tag that indicates that the message contains a large
>> amount of non-latin1 text? I do get a lot of legitimate non-ISO-8859-1
>> messages but usually it's just a name or at most an address. So less
>> than 100 bytes.
>>
>
> Please start a new thread and show us a sample of such
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 10:43:40 +0100
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 10.01.17 10:48, Emin Akbulut wrote:
> >Recently we receive spam messages and SA cannot block them.
>
> why should it? They seem ham to is.
>
> >I've also checked the raw message at
> >http://spamcheck.postmarkapp.com/ and sc
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 09:37:54 +0100
Marc Stürmer wrote:
> Am 2017-01-09 22:30, schrieb L A Walsh:
> > I have:
> >
> > bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam -5.0
> > bayes_auto_learn_threshold_spam 10.0
>
> In order for autolearn to work you need at least 200 trained messages
> in the ham and spam
Marc Stürmer wrote:
Am 2017-01-09 22:30, schrieb L A Walsh:
I have:
bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam -5.0
bayes_auto_learn_threshold_spam 10.0
In order for autolearn to work you need at least 200 trained messages
in the ham and spam category. If the filter doesn't know enough mails
yet it
Am 2017-01-10 08:48, schrieb Emin Akbulut:
Hi all,
Recently we receive spam messages and SA cannot block them.
I've also checked the raw message at http://spamcheck.postmarkapp.com/
and score was very low either.
I've trained the SA and it worked for a while but now it's useless.
How can I p
On 10.01.17 10:48, Emin Akbulut wrote:
Recently we receive spam messages and SA cannot block them.
why should it? They seem ham to is.
I've also checked the raw message at http://spamcheck.postmarkapp.com/
and score was very low either.
I've trained the SA and it worked for a while but now
Am 2017-01-09 22:30, schrieb L A Walsh:
I have:
bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam -5.0
bayes_auto_learn_threshold_spam 10.0
In order for autolearn to work you need at least 200 trained messages in
the ham and spam category. If the filter doesn't know enough mails yet
it will state it in the
On 10-01-17 07:07, Michael B Allen wrote:
> If I understand correctly, the BAYES_X tags add a value corresponding
> to the X value. So BAYES_99 is basically adding 0.99 to the spam
> score?
This is incorrect. The number in the tag only corresponds with the
result of the bayesian classification.
17 matches
Mail list logo