Re: txrep_autolearn range - how does the range influence autolearning

On Mon, 17 May 2021 15:32:48 + Lucas Rolff wrote: > Even for only inbound, do you suggest disabling txrep_spf there as > well, or only particularly important for outbound? For anything TxRep treats the header "From" address as having been authenticated by an SPF pass even if the pass came fr

Re: txrep_autolearn range - how does the range influence autolearning

Even for only inbound, do you suggest disabling txrep_spf there as well, or only particularly important for outbound? - Lucas On 17/05/2021, 17.14, "RW" wrote: On Sun, 16 May 2021 16:50:57 -0400 Greg Troxel wrote: > Lucas Rolff writes: > > > Thanks for the notes about

Re: txrep_autolearn range - how does the range influence autolearning

On Sun, 16 May 2021 16:50:57 -0400 Greg Troxel wrote: > Lucas Rolff writes: > > > Thanks for the notes about sa-learn, txrep outgoing and the > > autolearn itself. In my particular case, I'll only use it as an > > inbound filter, since I handle outbound very differently (I let > > other people t

Re: txrep_autolearn range - how does the range influence autolearning

Lucas Rolff writes: > Thanks for the notes about sa-learn, txrep outgoing and the autolearn itself. > In my particular case, I'll only use it as an inbound filter, since I > handle outbound very differently (I let other people take care of the > filtering using an external relay); For inbound I'

Re: txrep_autolearn range - how does the range influence autolearning

On Sun, 16 May 2021 13:36:34 -0400 Greg Troxel wrote: > > * txrep outgoing is really useful Did you find a reason why that's right? As I said before, my understanding is that it updates a reputation that only gets used on incoming mail that passes neither spf nor dkim. In other words it adds

Re: txrep_autolearn range - how does the range influence autolearning

urate than Braveheart. > I’ve trained my filter with sa-learn with a quite large chunk of > emails (both spam and ham), which is why I also want to enable > autolearning of txrep That's why you shouldn't use autolearning. Autolearning is something that should b

Re: txrep_autolearn range - how does the range influence autolearning

pam and ham), which is why I also want to enable > autolearning of txrep That's why you shouldn't use autolearning. Autolearning is something that should be used as a last resort. The affect of mistraining on TxRep is potentially much worse than its affect on Bayes. TxRep will still do its score averaging without it.

Re: txrep_autolearn range - how does the range influence autolearning

r value > results in (other than 0 disables it). Unfortunately my suggestion is to read the sources. > I’ve trained my filter with sa-learn with a quite large chunk of > emails (both spam and ham), which is why I also want to enable > autolearning of txrep – I just ideally want to

txrep_autolearn range - how does the range influence autolearning

filter with sa-learn with a quite large chunk of emails (both spam and ham), which is why I also want to enable autolearning of txrep – I just ideally want to figure out prior to doing that, what effect the given numbers have on the autolearning process. I’d be very grateful if anyone got

Re: Question about scoring and autolearning

On 4/18/19 9:05 PM, @lbutlr wrote: > On 18 Apr 2019, at 12:32, Sam wrote: >> I guess I’ll have to raise some scores to make it learn. > Reconsider. The message was clearly marked as spam with a score more than 6 > times the threshold. There is nothing here to train, SA did its job. You have a g

Re: Question about scoring and autolearning

On 18 Apr 2019, at 12:32, Sam wrote: > I guess I’ll have to raise some scores to make it learn. Reconsider. The message was clearly marked as spam with a score more than 6 times the threshold. There is nothing here to train, SA did its job. -- Light thinks it travels faster than anything but

Re: Question about scoring and autolearning

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:56:25 +0200 Sam wrote: > Dear fellow SpamAssassin users, > > I’ve read everything I could find on scoring and autolearning before > posting here, and yet cannot figure why autolearn triggers properly in > the presence of ham but never triggers when SpamAssas

Re: Question about scoring and autolearning

On 4/18/19 8:19 PM, @lbutlr wrote: > On 18 Apr 2019, at 11:56, Sam wrote: >> However, even with heavy spam, autolearn does not seem to engage in spam >> mode. > Why do you think it should? > > Did you check the message with spamassassin -D? > > You might want to read this: > >

Re: Question about scoring and autolearning

On 18 Apr 2019, at 11:56, Sam wrote: > However, even with heavy spam, autolearn does not seem to engage in spam > mode. Why do you think it should? Did you check the message with spamassassin -D? You might want to read this: --

Question about scoring and autolearning

Dear fellow SpamAssassin users, I’ve read everything I could find on scoring and autolearning before posting here, and yet cannot figure why autolearn triggers properly in the presence of ham but never triggers when SpamAssassin is fed spam. My global settings for SpamAssassin 3.4.2 launched

Re: Bayes autolearning: logarithmic?

On Thu, 2013-05-23 at 02:29 +0100, RW wrote: > On Wed, 22 May 2013 20:44:58 +0200 Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > > Is the autolearning supposed to accelerate? I can't help but feel > > > like it may just be feeding itself it's own data or something. > >

Re: Bayes autolearning: logarithmic?

On Wed, 22 May 2013 20:44:58 +0200 Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 11:34 -0400, Andrew Talbot wrote: > > I set up Bayes with autolearning a few weeks ago. It took forever to > > get started, but now it seems like the learning speed has > > acceler

Re: Bayes autolearning: logarithmic?

On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 11:34 -0400, Andrew Talbot wrote: > I set up Bayes with autolearning a few weeks ago. It took forever to > get started, but now it seems like the learning speed has accelerated. > > Is the autolearning supposed to accelerate? I can't help but feel like

Bayes autolearning: logarithmic?

Hey all - I set up Bayes with autolearning a few weeks ago. It took forever to get started, but now it seems like the learning speed has accelerated. Is the autolearning supposed to accelerate? I can't help but feel like it may just be feeding itself it's own data or something.

Re: Bayes Autolearning

On Wed, 2013-05-01 at 14:35 -0400, Andrew Talbot wrote: > Thank you for that! > > Off-list you mentioned that you don't need to set the cron/expire because of > Redis features; why is it commented out here? Because it is a comment about a cron job, followed by an actual 'sa-learn' command. Comm

RE: Bayes Autolearning

Hey there, thanks for responding. That's an interesting point. Are you saying I should not use autolearning at all? I don't have any way to review a large corpus of messages because we don't have access to them - after they run through our servers they are sent on, and the text

Re: Bayes Autolearning

ng is to learn a few thousand hams and spams by any means; and train-on-error can take a long time to get there. For this reason DSPAM only allows train-on-error when 2500 hams have been learned. There *may* be advantages to train-on-error after this in preventing BAYES becoming insensitive t

Re: Bayes Autolearning

On 01/05/13 19:40, Andrew Talbot wrote: Hi, Seve - Thanks for your response. Is that just for performance reasons? Performance is one of the things that bayes_auto_learn_on_error 1 will give you. It means that if the message was already considered spam by Bayes, then the message won't be a

RE: Bayes Autolearning

Hi, Seve - Thanks for your response. Is that just for performance reasons? > -Original Message- > From: Steve Freegard [mailto:steve.freeg...@fsl.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 2:24 PM > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org > Subject: Re: Bayes Autolearning >

RE: Bayes Autolearning

sassin.apache.org > Subject: Re: Bayes Autolearning > > On 05/01/2013 08:01 PM, Andrew Talbot wrote: > > > Any suggestions any of you have for a Bayes newbie - about what I just > > asked or otherwise - would be very much appreciated. > > I advocate autolearning as it h

Re: Bayes Autolearning

01 PM, Andrew Talbot wrote: Any suggestions any of you have for a Bayes newbie - about what I just asked or otherwise - would be very much appreciated. I advocate autolearning as it has always worked fine for me. Can take a bit longer to see good results but with some tuning I can sit back and he

Re: Bayes Autolearning

On 05/01/2013 08:01 PM, Andrew Talbot wrote: Any suggestions any of you have for a Bayes newbie - about what I just asked or otherwise - would be very much appreciated. I advocate autolearning as it has always worked fine for me. Can take a bit longer to see good results but with some tuning

Bayes Autolearning

Hey All - I'm about to set up Bayes on one of our mail servers. A lot of the documentation says that I need to manually sift through a few hundred messages and classify them to 'teach' the filter, and it sounds like I may need to do that on an ongoing basis. That is not a very plausible so

Re: Autolearning from rules rather than score

On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:32:05 +0100 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > On 28.01.09 22:36, RW wrote: > > I just pass it though dspam and then score like this: > > > > header DS_HAM X-DSPAM-Result =~ /^(Innocent|Whitelisted)/ > > header DS_SPAM X-DSPAM-Result =~ /^Spam/ > > meta DS_

Re: Autolearning from rules rather than score

Rw wrote on Thu, 29 Jan 2009 03:23:47 +: > > > However, thinking about it a bit more, I think that the only real > > > problem is that ham that scores between 0.1 and 5.0 > > > wont be learned as ham, and I can fix that by moving the autolearn > > > threshold to up to 4.9. > > > > Eek! No, t

Re: Autolearning from rules rather than score

On 29.01.09 03:23, RW wrote: > I meant have Bayes learn from the DSPAM header rules that I quoted. > What does the plugin actually do that simply piping mail though DSPAM > before SA doesn't? you want SA BAYES filter to learn from what will DSPAM filter tell it? You can do that with procmail/mail

Re: Autolearning from rules rather than score

On 28.01.09 22:36, RW wrote: > I just pass it though dspam and then score like this: > > header DS_HAM X-DSPAM-Result =~ /^(Innocent|Whitelisted)/ > header DS_SPAM X-DSPAM-Result =~ /^Spam/ > meta DS_HAM_FULL DS_HAM && (BAYES_00 || BAYES_05) > > scoreDS_HAM-2.5 > s

Re: Autolearning from rules rather than score

o clean way of tricking SA into learning *everything* > above and below a given threshold. > > Also, a certain gray area is better not learned automatically. > Seriously. False learning *immediately* will have an impact on further > results. Whereas learning after a manual re-view is

Re: Autolearning from rules rather than score

On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 22:36 +, RW wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:02:59 +0100 > Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > > On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, RW wrote: > > > > > > > I was wondering if it's possible to control autolearning based > > > >

Re: Autolearning from rules rather than score

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:02:59 +0100 Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 12:16 -0800, John Hardin wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, RW wrote: > > > > > I was wondering if it's possible to control autolearning based > > > on rules. > >

Re: Autolearning from rules rather than score

On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 12:16 -0800, John Hardin wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, RW wrote: > > > I was wondering if it's possible to control autolearning based on rules. No. And even tweaking the various thresholds will not help, since auto-learning is based on the score *wi

Re: Autolearning from rules rather than score

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, RW wrote: I was wondering if it's possible to control autolearning based on rules. I'm scoring DSPAM into Spamassassin, and since DSPAM autolearns everything, it would be sensible to synchronise the learning, so when I correct dspam the same set of mails

Autolearning from rules rather than score

I was wondering if it's possible to control autolearning based on rules. I'm scoring DSPAM into Spamassassin, and since DSPAM autolearns everything, it would be sensible to synchronise the learning, so when I correct dspam the same set of mails need to be corrected in Spamassassin.

Re: Clustering spamassassin + autolearning

Thank you all for your (quick) answers! @Kai: mailwatch has a training facility built in. But this is only possible on messages in quarantine. If a message is passed by mailscanner (for example, because of BAYES_00, which is sometimes the case), it is sent to the mailbox server, and it's not possib

Re: Clustering spamassassin + autolearning

Peter Fastré wrote on Tue, 25 Nov 2008 16:04:19 +0100: > 2. On my mailbox server I'd like to have a script which goes into the > mailfolders, searches for a folder with the name 'Spam', feeds the message > to sa-learn (which should be feeding it to the same bayes database of > course), and then de

Re: Clustering spamassassin + autolearning

Yes - you can use multiple SA servers talking to a common MySQL database. I'm doing it with about 5 servers and it works. The answer to question 2 is - YES. I'm using Exim for an MTA and I use white lists and black lists to prefilter spam. That greatly reduces the SA load. Peter Fastré wrote

Re: Clustering spamassassin + autolearning

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hey Peter, I have been working on this kind of setup last week. On Nov 25, 2008, at 4:04 PM, Peter Fastré wrote: Hello guys, I'm running a small-sized hosting provider and currently our setup is following: 1 mailbox server running exim (only

RE: Clustering spamassassin + autolearning

[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 25. november 2008 16:04 To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Clustering spamassassin + autolearning Hello guys, I'm running a small-sized hosting provider and currently our setup is following: 1 mailbox server running exim (only local

Re: Clustering spamassassin + autolearning

On Tue, November 25, 2008 16:04, Peter Fastré wrote: > approach of having my users train the spam filters this way? Maybe there are > already such scripts available? http://johannes.sipsolutions.net/Projects/dovecot-antispam http://dovecot.org/ and full enabled with sieve / managesieve http://si

Clustering spamassassin + autolearning

Hello guys, I'm running a small-sized hosting provider and currently our setup is following: 1 mailbox server running exim (only local delivery) 1 antispam server running exim + mailscanner + spamassassin + mailwatch -> sends all approved mail to mailbox server 2 mysql servers (master-slave) runn

Re: Shortcircuit and Autolearning

Clayton Keller wrote: After looking through old list posts and the Wiki, I was under the impression that I could enable autolearning by setting a tflags value for the shortcircuited rule. For instance: priorityTEST-500 describeTESTMy Test shortcircuitTESTspam score

Shortcircuit and Autolearning

After looking through old list posts and the Wiki, I was under the impression that I could enable autolearning by setting a tflags value for the shortcircuited rule. For instance: priorityTEST-500 describeTESTMy Test shortcircuitTESTspam score TEST

autolearning

keep up with the retraining, assuming that is true, how would this effect the overall accuracy. The few messages that are incorrectly learned would be timely relearned correctly. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/autolearning-tf3334541.html#a9272701 Sent from the SpamAssassin

Re: Will bayes-db be 'skewed' by ... autolearning ham?

Hi all, Loren Wilton wrote: May be I should change the threshholds for autolearning different from the default? (I never touched them so far). Yes. Set it to -0.1. If you have been doing a lot of autolearning without this you may have a moderately sick bayes db, and might want to

Re: Will bayes-db be 'skewed' by ... autolearning ham?

May be I should change the threshholds for autolearning different from the default? (I never touched them so far). Yes. Set it to -0.1. If you have been doing a lot of autolearning without this you may have a moderately sick bayes db, and might want to consider starting over

Re: Will bayes-db be 'skewed' by ... autolearning ham?

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006, Dirk Bonengel wrote: > did you investigate auto-learning? This might let your system learn ham > as well as spam. Works fine here (same situation - gateway server to a > Lotus Notes system, no feedback loop possible) May be I should change the threshholds for aut

Re: Selectively disabling bayes autolearning

>... >Is it possible to selectively disable bayes autolearning? > >For example, I would like auto learning disabled for mail sent to >this mailing list since all this spam discussion and forwarded spam >snippets would probably pollute the bayses database (which probably &

Re: Selectively disabling bayes autolearning

On Tuesday 09 August 2005 15:55, Steve Martin wrote: >Is it possible to selectively disable bayes autolearning? > >For example, I would like auto learning disabled for mail sent to >this mailing list since all this spam discussion and forwarded spam >snippets would probably pol

Re: Selectively disabling bayes autolearning

Steve Martin wrote: Is it possible to selectively disable bayes autolearning? For example, I would like auto learning disabled for mail sent to this mailing list since all this spam discussion and forwarded spam snippets would probably pollute the bayses database (which probably thinks

Selectively disabling bayes autolearning

Is it possible to selectively disable bayes autolearning? For example, I would like auto learning disabled for mail sent to this mailing list since all this spam discussion and forwarded spam snippets would probably pollute the bayses database (which probably thinks very highly of

Re: Spamassassin only autolearning ham, not spam after upgrade to 3.0.2

Kelly Corbin wrote: > > What is this 'learned-points'? That's what score the BAYES_* rules would have given this message based on existing learning. This is basically used to prevent SA from automatically learning anything that noticeably contradicts the existing training. > Is my database po

Re: Spamassassin only autolearning ham, not spam after upgrade to 3.0.2

That did the trick! I just copied over the databases from one of the good machines and right away it started doing the autolearn=spam. Thanks for all your help. Kelly Kevin Peuhkurinen wrote: Kelly Corbin wrote: Here's my auto-learn lines from the machine that doesn't work: debug: auto-learn: cu

Re: Spamassassin only autolearning ham, not spam after upgrade to 3.0.2

Kelly Corbin wrote: Here's my auto-learn lines from the machine that doesn't work: debug: auto-learn: currently using scoreset 3, recomputing score based on scoreset 1. debug: auto-learn: message score: 23.316, computed score for autolearn: 24.06 debug: auto-learn? ham=0.1, spam=10, body-points=1

Re: Spamassassin only autolearning ham, not spam after upgrade to 3.0.2

from 2.64 and everything seems to be working pretty good with the exception of one machine. After watching the mail log, I noticed that it is not autolearning any spam, no matter how high it scores. It does autolearn ham however, and the other 3 machines autolearn spam fine. I've looked at every

Re: Spamassassin only autolearning ham, not spam after upgrade to 3.0.2

machine. After watching the mail log, I noticed that it is not autolearning any spam, no matter how high it scores. It does autolearn ham however, and the other 3 machines autolearn spam fine. I've looked at everything I can think of (configuration files, file permissions, checked FAQ's

Spamassassin only autolearning ham, not spam after upgrade to 3.0.2

watching the mail log, I noticed that it is not autolearning any spam, no matter how high it scores. It does autolearn ham however, and the other 3 machines autolearn spam fine. I've looked at everything I can think of (configuration files, file permissions, checked FAQ's, searched list arc

Re: autolearning (was: Re: how to pernamently delete spam messages with spam level over 12?)

gt; Why can't you recommend sa-autolearn? From my experience (sa with > autolearning enabled, sitewide installation), autolearning is a very > good option. I've watched too many people report messed up Bayes databases with it try to get help on this list. (If really messed up delete

autolearning (was: Re: how to pernamently delete spam messages with spam level over 12?)

On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:03:16AM -0800, jdow wrote: >to train its Bayes database on spam and ham messages. You can either >tell SpamAssassin to autolearn (which I do not use or recommend) or Why can't you recommend sa-autolearn? From my experience (sa with autolearn

Re: Problem with Bayes and AutoLearning

I changed the path just in case. It was that way as a mistake anyhow. Here is the output of lint. (it is exactly the same as with the other paths so I am sure that is not the issue.) Note that it works there. Although not when run through procmail. I think your idea about users is on to somethi

Re: Problem with Bayes and AutoLearning

At 04:10 PM 9/24/2004, Thomas Bolioli wrote: I do not believe that is an issue. It only puts the bayes databases at ~/.spammer_toks and ~/.spammer_seen. sa-learn has not had a problem loading the databases. They have grown everytime I have used it. I can't see why spamd would have a problem with

Re: Problem with Bayes and AutoLearning

I do not believe that is an issue. It only puts the bayes databases at ~/.spammer_toks and ~/.spammer_seen. sa-learn has not had a problem loading the databases. They have grown everytime I have used it. I can't see why spamd would have a problem with it. Tom Matt Kettler wrote: At 03:40 PM 9/2

Re: Problem with Bayes and AutoLearning

At 03:40 PM 9/24/2004, Thomas Bolioli wrote: bayes_path ~/.spammer This statement is invalid if a directory named ".spammer" exists in the user's home.. Please read the docs on bayes_path VERY carefully. Despite being named "path" it's really "path, plus filename prefix". Thus bayes_path should

Problem with Bayes and AutoLearning

I am having a problem with 2.63 not using bayes. (NB: setup is using individual data and triggering using .4ward, procmail and postfix with no individual .sa and .procmail files) I have trained each of three accounts with over 1000 ham and some 48K spam messages. SA is working and tagging spam