Chris 'Xenon' Hanson wrote:
>
> I believe SA uses Bayes out of the box, but what I don't get is how
> will Bayes know it's spam (to train on, versus ham) if there isn't
> already a rule that flags it as spam somehow? I guess the RBL rules
> will help.
sa-learn --spam messagefile.txt
Henrik Krohns wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 12:18:06AM -0600, Chris 'Xenon' Hanson wrote:
That's just a source code search engine. It's showing files it found in
SVN on the SpamAssassin site, here:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/rules/trunk/sandbox/jm/20_sought.cf?view=log
Unfor
I believe SA uses Bayes out of the box, but what I don't get is how will
Bayes know it's spam (to train on, versus ham)
You tell it.
Bayes won't kick in on a new installation until you have manually fed it AT
LEAST 200 each hams and spams. You do this by deciding yourself if a
message is h
Henrik Krohns writes:
> http://taint.org/2007/08/15/004348a.html
Ah, my auto-generated ruleset! Yes, please try it out -- it works very
well indeed ;)
(If anyone gets any FPs from it, I'd appreciate if you could package them
up as an mbox, zip it, and mail it to me to avoid them in future. But
Jeff Chan wrote:
Turn on SURBL tests. ecamn.com is blacklisted on SURBL.
Ok. According to
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/SURBL
http://www.surbl.org/faq.html#nettest
SA 3.x have SURBL by default and it should be enabled if I'm not starting spamd with
the -L/--local option. My /etc/de
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 11:53:09PM -0600, Chris 'Xenon' Hanson wrote:
> And yet, sometimes the spam that makes it through is startlingly obvious.
> Lots of expletives about male anatomy and the like, in plaintext mails. I
> turned on the X-Spam-Report header to see how things were going. A typica
Quoting Chris 'Xenon' Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[...]
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=4.4 required=4.0
> X-Spam-Level:
> X-Spam-Report: SA TESTS
>0.1 FORGED_RCVD_HELO Received: contains a forged HELO
>0.1 HTML_40_50 BODY: Message is 40% to 50% HTML
>0.0 HTML_MESSAGE
