"Amir 'CG' Caspi" writes:
> Well, not really true, because of the rising resurgence of spammers using
> image-based spam, i.e. the number of words in text/plain or text/html is
> very low, and all of the spam content is embedded in a binary attached
> image, which uses either regular links or ev
On 1/10/2014 2:28 AM, Henrik K wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 08:14:20PM -0700, Amir 'CG' Caspi wrote:
What's the way that I can inject the bayes-identified tokens (hammy or
spammy) into my SA headers, so that I can try to debug what's causing this
problem?
Manual debug:
spamassassin -t -D baye
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 08:14:20PM -0700, Amir 'CG' Caspi wrote:
>
> What's the way that I can inject the bayes-identified tokens (hammy or
> spammy) into my SA headers, so that I can try to debug what's causing this
> problem?
Manual debug:
spamassassin -t -D bayes < message | grep bayes:
(of co
On Thu, January 9, 2014 9:46 pm, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> Unfortunately, well, for the scumbags, the shorter it gets, the less
> likely it is to be understood. Fallen for. Or even understood to be
> actual language.
Well, not really true, because of the rising resurgence of spammers using
imag
On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 20:14 -0700, Amir 'CG' Caspi wrote:
> On Thu, January 9, 2014 6:20 pm, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > Even the most effective results I have ever seen on a non-personal
> > attack is merely getting the Bayes classification to a neutral. And that
> > was not a "regular" text to
On Thu, January 9, 2014 6:20 pm, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> Even the most effective results I have ever seen on a non-personal
> attack is merely getting the Bayes classification to a neutral. And that
> was not a "regular" text token, but includes mail headers. And a biased
> Bayes database towa
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 02:20:33 +0100
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> Even the most effective results I have ever seen on a non-personal
> attack is merely getting the Bayes classification to a neutral. And
> that was not a "regular" text token, but includes mail headers. And a
> biased Bayes database
On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 01:56 +, Mark Tully wrote:
> One pattern of messages which I’ve noticed slip through are those which
> have a multipart and have a block of bayes poisoning text in the
> text/plain part, with the real spam payload in the text/html part.
> What I’m seeing is that the text/
Hi all,
I’m new to SA and I’ve been evaluating how it performs on my inbox.
I’m using bayes and I’ve been teaching it for a couple of months now, but I
haven’t been seeing the type of success I’d been hoping for. Basically, I’m
seeing messages very similar to messages I’ve taught it several tim
