Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

On 8/4/2010 6:07 PM, Happy Chap wrote: > > No, we're not using an SQL backend and every users has their own bayes > database. You mentioned previously that you are using 'sa-learn -u'. I thought that option only worked with SQL databases? In my setup, I have lots of virtual users under the same

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

> >It's unlikely that that could push the BAYES RESULT down to BAYES_00 > >unless there is uncorrected mistraining. On 04.08.10 06:07, Happy Chap wrote: > Possibly, but I suspect mistraining isn't a problem because apart from this > specific type of spam, Spamassassin is doing (and has done for so

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

, > not stay at 00. The tokens should help tell you why. > > OK, will do. Thanks again for your help Karsten. David. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Text-contained-in-HTML-comments-causing-BAYES_00-to-classify-as-non-spam-tp29342874p29351738.html Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 14:39 -0700, Happy Chap wrote: > Bowie Bailey wrote: > > Stupid question here, but are you sure you are training the same > > database that SA is using? > > > > This is a fairly frequent problem. Common cases are: > > > > 1) SA being called as 'mailuser' and you are doing

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

n't be necessary). If this doesn't sound right, by all means say - it's quite a while since i set all this up! Training is definitely happening on a per user basis (ie. the script is calling sa-learn -u). Thanks, David. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Tex

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

On 8/4/2010 4:24 PM, Happy Chap wrote: > Bowie Bailey wrote: >> On 8/4/2010 4:23 AM, Happy Chap wrote: >> >> You ARE manually training bayes (sa-learn) on these missed spams, >> right? That is probably the most useful thing you can do if you are >> getting Bayes_00 on them. > Hi Bowie, oh yes, e

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

database and see if running SA 3.3.1 improves the situation. Thanks everyone for their help. David. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Text-contained-in-HTML-comments-causing-BAYES_00-to-classify-as-non-spam-tp29342874p29351002.html Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

they have about 34k identified spam mails in their bayes db, so these extra 800 would amount to about 2%. Perhaps that's just not enough? Thanks, David. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Text-contained-in-HTML-comments-causing-BAYES_00-to-classify-as-non-spam-tp29342874p293

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

t. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Text-contained-in-HTML-comments-causing-BAYES_00-to-classify-as-non-spam-tp29342874p29350820.html Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Happy Chap wrote: In that case (and I've been barking up the wrong tree) do you have any suggestion as to what my next move should be to try to trap this type of spam? I'm moderately technical, but I think I've probably reached the limit of my current knowledge but am happy

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

On 8/4/2010 4:23 AM, Happy Chap wrote: > Hi, > > We started getting (over the last 2 months say) lots of spam, which > Spamassassin isn't picking up as spam. Analysing these, they all seem to be > of the same type where many paragraphs of random text are "hidden" inside an > HTML comment (either c

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 06:58:52AM -0700, Happy Chap wrote: > > > > Henrik K wrote: > > > > > > Instead of speculating, try: > > > > cat msg | spamassassin -t -D bayes 2>&1 | grep bayes: > > > > It will tell you exactly what tokens are considered. > > > > > > Hi Henrik, > > Thanks for yo

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

st point me in the right direction. Thanks, David. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Text-contained-in-HTML-comments-causing-BAYES_00-to-classify-as-non-spam-tp29342874p29346570.html Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 01:23:32AM -0700, Happy Chap wrote: > > Hi, > > We started getting (over the last 2 months say) lots of spam, which > Spamassassin isn't picking up as spam. Analysing these, they all seem to be > of the same type where many paragraphs of random text are "hidden" inside an

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

ught that of itself would have perhaps been picked up by a rule to identify it as spam. Thanks again, David. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Text-contained-in-HTML-comments-causing-BAYES_00-to-classify-as-non-spam-tp29342874p29345981.html Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 01:23:32 -0700 (PDT) Happy Chap wrote: > > Hi, > > We started getting (over the last 2 months say) lots of spam, which > Spamassassin isn't picking up as spam. Analysing these, they all seem > to be of the same type where many paragraphs of random text are > "hidden" inside a

Text contained in HTML comments causing BAYES_00 to classify as non-spam

is probably won't make much difference because I'm already using the latest rule sets thanks to sa-update)? Any ideas/help would be very gratefully received as the users are now getting restless and, bayes training isn't really helping. Thanks. David. -- View this message in contex