On Samstag 23 Mai 2009 Chris wrote:
> EmailB
Of 71 messages where EMAILBL hit, 3 were still marked ham but really
spam (points: 2.0, 3.0, 3.1), no FPs. One message was just pushed over
5.0 by EMAILBL and would have been a FN otherwise.
So it helps here. We have a very hard setup and only few sp
On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 16:43 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> >
> > Those are not the total spam for the day but the cumulative spam from
> > one day to the next. Though the percentile if figured on the total
>
> Ah, yees. :) Thanks. I was missing the base before you enabled EmailBL.
> So tha
On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 21:53 -0500, Chris wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 04:11 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > Sorry, no. :) The dates and numbers don't match, unless you didn't get
> > any spam early this month.
> Is this what you're looking for:
> Starting point as of 13 May with plug-in
On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 04:11 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> What about some grep love, and splitting that up in at least less and
> greater than a total of score 15? See my post about 6 hours ago, and
> considerably more hits in the low-ish scoring spam.
>
>
> > Spam: 192
> > (thats a total
What about some grep love, and splitting that up in at least less and
greater than a total of score 15? See my post about 6 hours ago, and
considerably more hits in the low-ish scoring spam.
> Spam: 192
> (thats a total count since 3 May)
>
> Totals since last Thursday 14 May
> Rule Name
Ham: 329
Spam: 192
(thats a total count since 3 May)
Totals since last Thursday 14 May
EmailBL.cf:
Rule NameScore Ham Spam %of Ham %of Spam
---
EMAILBL_TEST_LEM 0.50 0 11 0.
Ham: 294
Spam: 163
EmailBL.cf:
Rule Name Score Ham Spam %of Ham %of Spam
---
EMAILBL_TEST_LEM 0.50 0 10 0.00% 6.13%
--
Well since we're all doing show-and-tell, so far in the past 24 hours
2310 email have triggered the EMAILBL* rules, of which (with the default
0.5 score) 70 were FN
i.e. if I increased the score to 2, all those 70 would have been marked
as spam (and I checked: they were spam)
--
Cheers
Jason Ha
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 10:50 -0400, DAve wrote:
I will see about the update, for now the last five days stats are as
follows.
Total mail through SA = 208,498
Total spam messages tagged with EMAILBL = 1471
Total non spam messages tagged with EMAILBL = 128
What exactl
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 10:50 -0400, DAve wrote:
> I will see about the update, for now the last five days stats are as
> follows.
>
> Total mail through SA = 208,498
> Total spam messages tagged with EMAILBL = 1471
> Total non spam messages tagged with EMAILBL = 128
What exactly are these?
> FP
Henrik K wrote:
> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 08:25:58AM -0500, Chris wrote:
>> Started running the plug-in Thursday and though I don't get much spam a
>> day I am getting hits:
>>
>> Ham: 232
>> Spam: 113
>> (thats a total count since 3 May)
>>
>> EmailBL.cf:
>> Rule Name Score Ha
I installed the plugin last Tuesday. As of this morning (using the
original domain list):
Total Messages Processed: 2933
Number identified as spam: 2464
Total number tagged by EMAILBL: 7
Number of FNs tagged by EMAILBL: 2
The two FNs scored a 3. So if EMAILBL had enough weight, SA would have
c
Henrik K wrote:
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 08:25:58AM -0500, Chris wrote:
Started running the plug-in Thursday and though I don't get much spam a
day I am getting hits:
Ham: 232
Spam: 113
(thats a total count since 3 May)
EmailBL.cf:
Rule Name Score Ham Spam %of Ham %of
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 08:25:58AM -0500, Chris wrote:
> Started running the plug-in Thursday and though I don't get much spam a
> day I am getting hits:
>
> Ham: 232
> Spam: 113
> (thats a total count since 3 May)
>
> EmailBL.cf:
> Rule Name Score Ham Spam %of Ham %of
Started running the plug-in Thursday and though I don't get much spam a
day I am getting hits:
Ham: 232
Spam: 113
(thats a total count since 3 May)
EmailBL.cf:
Rule Name Score Ham Spam %of Ham %of Spam
---
15 matches
Mail list logo
