Michael,
I apologize for the perceived or real hostilityPeople have told me
of that implementation before, which that implemenation is perfectly
fine with me. More power to them, best wishes, and all the best. Let's
put some added value into NetMail which I think is a great product and
help
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 01:16:39AM -0500, Joe Flowers wrote:
> I know of that implemenation. And, I'm sure there are pluses and minus
> to both implementations.
>
> I've already tested my replacement spamd on SA 3.02 and it works the
> same with no problems found.
> I know there are a deprecated
I know of that implemenation. And, I'm sure there are pluses and minus
to both implementations.
I've already tested my replacement spamd on SA 3.02 and it works the
same with no problems found.
I know there are a deprecated call or two (get_hits for example) but I
see no reason that the new cal
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 12:55:24AM -0500, Joe Flowers wrote:
> I'll try to keep it as short as possible.
>
> By my preference and from hearing continuing horror stories about spamd,
> I have a C program in the place of spamd. It makes calls to Perl - Perl
> is "embedded" in the C program. The C
I'll try to keep it as short as possible.
By my preference and from hearing continuing horror stories about spamd,
I have a C program in the place of spamd. It makes calls to Perl - Perl
is "embedded" in the C program. The C spamd replacement talks to a C
program running on our NetWare NetMail (
Joe Flowers wrote:
Very preliminary results are no less than AWESOME.
So... how are you implementing the "drifting" spam threshold?
- Joe
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -1.44 to -0.5? That's very low! you must be using a lot of Bayes...
- --j.
Joe Flowers writes:
> Very preliminary results are no less than AWESOME. I'm seeing and people
> are reporting much higher rates of Spam being caught with no *reports*
Very preliminary results are no less than AWESOME. I'm seeing and people
are reporting much higher rates of Spam being caught with no *reports*
of an increase in false-positives. We'll see if that continues; the
proofs in the pudding. No sign of the dividing line drifting into a wall
yet. It se
Hey Joe. My 2.64 install is running so well, I almost don't want to
upgrade to 3.0.2, and I really don't need to spend too much time on it
to keep it that way. Perhaps you just need to devote a couple of
days to do some tweaking and thereafter it should run well on its own.
Finding out w
Joe
ahh well thenthe additional rules from www.rulemporium.com (not
bigevil.cf) will help alot.
as will the URI-RBL extras from www.surbl.org (see
http://sourceforge.net/projects/spamcopuri/ for a 2.64 patch to enable
this).
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Te
Interesting Chris...thanks for the feedback...at least maybe I'm still
on the planet somewhere..
My "monthly" word means that I've been feeling too good about myself
lately, so I'm due for a slap-down on how dumb I am.
J
Chr. von Stuckrad wrote:
On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 08:26:43AM -0500, Joe Flo
2.64 currently...I'm hoping to move to 3.0x soon...after I see how this
experiment goes.
It's just a plain-jane out-of-the-box install, nothing special, except
maybe I'm doing AWL checks too, which I've seen from the list can cause
some headaches from its use or misuse. Although, I have run this
On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 08:26:43AM -0500, Joe Flowers wrote:
> For us, SA *seems* to score SPAM messages with lower and lower hit
> scores as time goes by, and the users get more and more glassy-eyed over
> it's ("my" if you prefer) effectiveness as time goes by too.
OH, interesting, I think I h
Joe
what SA version and what extra rules? Using the URI-RBL's?
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
Joe Flowers wrote:
Later today I'll be implementing a "drifting" spam/ham dividing line
(one "line" for the entire system - not individually set per
Later today I'll be implementing a "drifting" spam/ham dividing line
(one "line" for the entire system - not individually set per email
account) to see how effective it is or how effective it appears to be.
I'm curious to know if the dividing line will drift into a wall on some
self-imposed bou
15 matches
Mail list logo
