poifgh wrote:
> Bowie Bailey wrote:
>
>> For auto-learning, the high and low scoring messages are fed to Bayes.
>> However, for an optimal setup, you should manually train Bayes on as
>> much of your (verified) ham and spam as possible. The more of your mail
>> stream Bayes sees, the better th
On 25-Sep-2009, at 03:56, Mark Martinec wrote:
LuKreme wrote:
Other surprises are that DKIM is pretty useless and SPF_PASS is
actually a slight spam indicator.
Benny Pedersen wrote:
so without some whitelist_from_* dkim and spf will not be helpfull
Indeed. Score points should be kept close t
LuKreme wrote:
> Other surprises are that DKIM is pretty useless and SPF_PASS is
> actually a slight spam indicator.
Benny Pedersen wrote:
> so without some whitelist_from_* dkim and spf will not be helpfull
Indeed. Score points should be kept close to zero for rules
DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID and D
On fre 25 sep 2009 09:58:41 CEST, LuKreme wrote
Other surprises are that DKIM is pretty useless and SPF_PASS is
actually a slight spam indicator.
you miss the point, there is no USER_IN_*
so without some whitelist_from_* dkim and spf will not be helpfull
if it was so you will have gived spam
On Sep 24, 2009, at 7:44 PM, poifgh wrote:
For 101st mail, if the regex MEDICINE is unable to match the
obfuscated
text, then the mail would have a low score, but bayesian learner
would say,
seeing the words surrounding obfuscated text, that this mail is spam.
Essentially this is how it wor
esian learner would say,
seeing the words surrounding obfuscated text, that this mail is spam.
Does it work this way? Does it work only this way [if not manually trained]?
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Understanding-SpamAssassin-tp25549227p25605170.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On tir 22 sep 2009 09:43:23 CEST, LuKreme wrote
bayes learning from ham helps score messages as
ham that might otherwise be tagged as ham.
ups :)
--
xpoint
On 21-Sep-2009, at 13:05, poifgh wrote:
Mails which have very high or very low score are fed to bayesian
learning.
Since we are confident about them being HAM or SPAM what do we want
to learn
from them - The regex filters have identified that the mail is a
spam (say),
what additional does ba
other words in
the spam mail (say words surrounding obfuscated term) in hope of matching
them in future emails? Or am I understanding it completely different?
Thnx for help.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Understanding-SpamAssassin-tp25530471p25530471.html
Sent from th
poifgh wrote:
> I am trying to understand inner workings of spam assassin and would be great
> if someone can answer my questions. I have read online documentation but
> there are still some questions left unanswered or I am not sure about.
>
I'm not an expert, just a long-time user, but I can
other words in
the spam mail (say words surrounding obfuscated term) in hope of matching
them in future emails? Or am I understanding it completely different?
Thnx for help.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Understanding-SpamAssassin-tp25530437p25530437.html
Sent from th
11 matches
Mail list logo
