On 2/15/2023 2:50 PM, hg user wrote:
And how to intercept?
From time to time we receive a message that is a reply-to to an old
message, sometimes after months, with just several lines added at the
top inviting to open a url or attachment.
Has this kind of phishing a name?
QakBot and Emotet
And how to intercept?
>From time to time we receive a message that is a reply-to to an old
message, sometimes after months, with just several lines added at the top
inviting to open a url or attachment.
Has this kind of phishing a name?
How can I prevent it or at least flag it for review?
Thank
he should not compare all the tokens but a rapid survey on the tokens
derived from headers can tell him how the bayes result was formed.
A couple of weeks ago some phishing reached our inboxes. Our custom rule
gave the message 5 points but I was surprised that the message was
categorized BAYES_00
However, many of tokens in even Forbes and WP newsletters may occure in
different spamy newsletters, so be careful when traning even these.
On 15.02.23 09:51, Alex wrote:
This is exactly what I was thinking. When going through the quarantine,
it's also very difficult to always not only identify
Hi,
>
> However, many of tokens in even Forbes and WP newsletters may occure in
> different spamy newsletters, so be careful when traning even these.
>
This is exactly what I was thinking. When going through the quarantine,
it's also very difficult to always not only identify which newsletters ma
On 15.02.23 14:53, hg user wrote:
If you run spamassasin with -D bayes -t xxx 2>debug.log
in debug.log you will see all the "tokens" the bayes system extracts
from the headers and you will probably find a lot of them related to
mailing lists.
If you teach SA that those tokens are spam and they
If you run spamassasin with -D bayes -t xxx 2>debug.log
in debug.log you will see all the "tokens" the bayes system extracts
from the headers and you will probably find a lot of them related to
mailing lists.
If you teach SA that those tokens are spam and they are present both
in WP or Forbes, t
*-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
>* [score: 0.]
This indicates a mistrained database, which means you have trained too
many
spams or spam-like messages (commercial messages) as ham.
Proper training of spams should help. Just keep your spam (and optionally
ham) corp
On 13.02.23 17:42, joe a wrote:
Have some annoying SPAM that consistently shows a negative score
on BAYES. Is the default scoring or influenced by BAYES in some
way?
*-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
* [score: 0.]
On 2/14/2023 2:56 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas w
