Greg Troxel wrote:
Alan writes:
It's sent to the bit bucket, not done in the MTA. In this case, each
account can set individual thresholds and has an individual set of
local rules, so that might be why. I'd prefer to 550 them as well,
although I suspect the majority of sources just don't care
Alan writes:
> It's sent to the bit bucket, not done in the MTA. In this case, each
> account can set individual thresholds and has an individual set of
> local rules, so that might be why. I'd prefer to 550 them as well,
> although I suspect the majority of sources just don't care. Lately the
>
On 2021-08-17 18:53, Greg Troxel wrote:
Alan <> writes:
I manage email for a couple of hundred domains, so a fair bit of stuff
that arrives to my inbox are spam complaints (they're supposed to open
tickets or use the support mailbox but... users). I flag anything over
5.0 as spam, but it stil
On 2021-08-17 18:03, David Bürgin wrote:
In your experience, what is a good ‘certain spam’ threshold? By that I
mean the score above which messages are virtually always spam, no false
positives.
basicly all above 5 is spam tagged with default spamassassin, it is so
as long as spamassassin does
Alan writes:
> I manage email for a couple of hundred domains, so a fair bit of stuff
> that arrives to my inbox are spam complaints (they're supposed to open
> tickets or use the support mailbox but... users). I flag anything over
> 5.0 as spam, but it still comes to my inbox. Anything over 8.0
I manage email for a couple of hundred domains, so a fair bit of stuff
that arrives to my inbox are spam complaints (they're supposed to open
tickets or use the support mailbox but... users). I flag anything over
5.0 as spam, but it still comes to my inbox. Anything over 8.0 goes to
the bit buc
David Bürgin writes:
[all the other replies sound 100% sensible to me]
> In your experience, what is a good ‘certain spam’ threshold? By that I
> mean the score above which messages are virtually always spam, no false
> positives.
There is no certainty; there is only probability. So you have
On 17.08.21 18:03, David Bürgin wrote:
In your experience, what is a good ‘certain spam’ threshold? By that I
mean the score above which messages are virtually always spam, no false
positives.
The default threshold for spam is 5.0, which works well for me. Only
very rarely a ham message scores a
Hi David,
If your default is in the 5 to 6 range for scoring, we have found that
11.0 has virtually no FPs and 15.0 has not had any FPs at our firm in years.
Regards,
KAM
On 8/17/2021 12:03 PM, David Bürgin wrote:
In your experience, what is a good ‘certain spam’ threshold? By that I
mean t
On Tue, 2021-08-17 at 18:03 +0200, David Bürgin wrote:
> In your experience, what is a good ‘certain spam’ threshold? By that I
> mean the score above which messages are virtually always spam, no
> false positives.
>
I pushed it one notch, to 6.0, but:
(a) I've accumulated a fair collection of p
In your experience, what is a good ‘certain spam’ threshold? By that I
mean the score above which messages are virtually always spam, no false
positives.
The default threshold for spam is 5.0, which works well for me. Only
very rarely a ham message scores above that and lands in my Junk folder.
Wo
11 matches
Mail list logo
