Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
i have site-wide config, as I only filter the mail and pass it on to
exchange- no ind users setup
Ok, so you're using a bayes_path and bayes_file_mode in your config?
Or are you always force-running SA as one non-root user, and su'ing to
that user for your training?
@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: -2.6 bayes_00
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
> i've trained SA with about 12000 messages that have made it through the
> filters , i last trained 1 week ago
>
Any chance you're training a different database than SA uses at delivery
time?
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
i've trained SA with about 12000 messages that have made it through the
filters , i last trained 1 week ago
Any chance you're training a different database than SA uses at delivery
time?
e.org
Subject: Re: -2.6 bayes_00
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
> Why does this hit on the most OBVIOUS messages?
>
> Its almost an oxymoron
>
Well, it's your responsibility to train your bayes database. It's
hitting BAYES_00 because it closely matches your nonspam training.
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
Why does this hit on the most OBVIOUS messages?
Its almost an oxymoron
Well, it's your responsibility to train your bayes database. It's
hitting BAYES_00 because it closely matches your nonspam training.
You can start correcting it by using sa-learn --spam on so
S must be trained, otherwise it might start hitting _00 because of new
spam phrases appear and old disappear
> 0.6 J_CHICKENPOX_34BODY: 3alpha-pock-4alpha
> 0.6 J_CHICKENPOX_64BODY: 6alpha-pock-4alpha
> 0.6 J_CHICKENPOX_82BODY: 8alpha-pock-2a
Why does this hit on the most OBVIOUS messages?
Its almost an oxymoron
How can all these rules get triggered
0.6 J_CHICKENPOX_34BODY: 3alpha-pock-4alpha
0.6 J_CHICKENPOX_64BODY: 6alpha-pock-4alpha
0.6 J_CHICKENPOX_82BODY: 8alpha-pock-2alpha
-2.6
