With the subject as it is; did anyone's filter kick this as spam? :-)
Clay
>>> "jdow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 5/17/2006 12:11 am >>>
From: "Benjamin Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In Four days,
> Spamassasin marked 1477 messages and missed 755 that where spam.
>
> I have my Required set to 5
>
> wha
From: "Benjamin Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In Four days,
Spamassasin marked 1477 messages and missed 755 that where spam.
I have my Required set to 5
what is the variable to drop the required in 3.1?
I is it still required_score?
Is there something else I can do to help the overall performan
Benjamin Adams wrote:
> Think I found the problem just don't know how to fix:
> running: spamassassin -D --lint 4261.
> [9990] warn: config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_90
Looks like you've got an old local config trying over-ride the score for
BAYES_90. However BAYES_90 no long
Benjamin Adams wrote:
> Think I found the problem just don't know how to fix:
> running: spamassassin -D --lint 4261.
> [9990] warn: config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_90
> [9990] dbg: check: is spam? score=2.907 required=5
> [9990] dbg: check:
tests=BAYES_50,MISSING_SUBJECT,NO_
Think I found the problem just don't know how to fix:
running: spamassassin -D --lint 4261.
[9990] warn: config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_90
[9990] dbg: check: is spam? score=2.907 required=5
[9990] dbg: check:
tests=BAYES_50,MISSING_SUBJECT,NO_REAL_NAME,NO_RECEIVED,NO_RELA
Benjamin Adams wrote:
> I'm not getting a BAYES_XX in any email headers, The email you sent
> me had:
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.104 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=AWL
> X-Spam-Level:
>
> Does this mean my variable is wrong in local.cf?
Not that the variable is wrong, but the directory may h
I'm not getting a BAYES_XX in any email headers, The email you sent
me had:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.104 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=AWL
X-Spam-Level:
Does this mean my variable is wrong in local.cf?
-Ben
On May 16, 2006, at 12:43 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
Benjamin Adams wrote:
I am u
Benjamin Adams wrote:
> I am using sa-learn on the missed messages(using for a few months now
> seems to be no help)
Define "no help". Are you seeing BAYES_XX hits on your email? Are
you sure you are learning to the same database SA is using?
You might want to try learning from ALL of your mail
David Baron wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 May 2006 18:50, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> >
> > a) use sa-udpate
> This is not yet contributing to successful spam flagging. Still
> problematic and may be the cause rather than the cure right now
The only problems I have encountered are simply making it work. O
I am using sa-learn on the missed messages(using for a few months now
seems to be no help)
SpamAssassin Server version 3.1.1
running on Perl 5.8.6
my local.cf
# Bayesian Auto Learn
bayes_auto_learn1
bayes_file_mode 0777
bayes_path /var/mail/spamassassin/bayes
baye
I agree with the Theo. 3.1 is too low. You don't want to reject real
mail.
1) Use the network/dns tests.
2) increase the score on individual rules especially those for URIBL
score URIBL_WS_SURBL 5.5
score URIBL_SBL 5.5
score URIBL_OB_SURBL 5.5
score DRUGS_ERECTILE 5.0
Study the mails to see wha
I agree with the Theo. 3.1 is too low. You don't want to reject real
mail.
1) Use the network/dns tests.
2) increase the score on individual rules especially those for URIBL
score URIBL_WS_SURBL 5.5
score URIBL_SBL 5.5
score URIBL_OB_SURBL 5.5
score DRUGS_ERECTILE 5.0
Study the mails to see wha
On Tuesday 16 May 2006 18:50, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 11:42:56AM -0400, Benjamin Adams wrote:
> > Spamassasin marked 1477 messages and missed 755 that where spam.
>
> Seems unusual.
>
> > what is the variable to drop the required in 3.1?
> > I is it still required_score?
>
On Dienstag, 16. Mai 2006 17:42 Benjamin Adams wrote:
> Is there something else I can do to help the overall performance?
If you mean "performance" like "correctness":
1) Harden your MTA, e.g. use some RBL there, greylisting helps a lot,
SPF checking also
2) SA could maybe need additional rules,
On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 11:42:56AM -0400, Benjamin Adams wrote:
> Spamassasin marked 1477 messages and missed 755 that where spam.
Seems unusual.
> what is the variable to drop the required in 3.1?
> I is it still required_score?
Yes, but I wouldn't do that due to the large FP increase.
> Is th
15 matches
Mail list logo
