On 06/07/2014 03:55 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 06.06.14 18:06, Daniele Paoni wrote:
I deleted the bayes database and trained it using real spam&ham
I would not clear the BAYES DB so fast. Even BAYES_00 spam can become
BAYES_99 after a few properly trained samples.
OK, I will keep
On 06/05/2014 09:25 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
Seems the only problems Daniele could solve are obsolete rules and
mistrained BAYES database.
On 06.06.14 18:06, Daniele Paoni wrote:
I deleted the bayes database and trained it using real spam&ham
I would not clear the BAYES DB so fast.
On 06/05/2014 09:25 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> Seems the only problems Daniele could solve are obsolete rules and
> mistrained BAYES database.
>
Hello
I deleted the bayes database and trained it using real spam&ham
Today I got another one of these emails, the strange thing is that if
On 6/4/2014 11:04 AM, Daniele Paoni wrote:
I will try to retrain my bayes database.
... and run sa-update and reload your spamd.
If you keep some of your spam and ham samples, re-train them properly.
Those that misfired are more important.
On 04.06.14 11:56, Bowie Bailey wrote:
That message wo
On 6/4/2014 2:10 PM, daniele...@libertyline.it wrote:
Il 04-06-2014 17:56 Bowie Bailey ha scritto:
That message would have been blocked before it even got to my spam
folder. Even taking out the blacklists and Bayes, it still would have
scored 5.2 and I think those are all stock rules. Actuall
Il 04-06-2014 17:56 Bowie Bailey ha scritto:
That message would have been blocked before it even got to my spam
folder. Even taking out the blacklists and Bayes, it still would have
scored 5.2 and I think those are all stock rules. Actually, the KAM
rule indicates that it would have also hit S
On 6/4/2014 11:04 AM, Daniele Paoni wrote:
On 06/04/2014 04:36 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
The problem isn't that BAYES_00 subtracts 1.9 points. The problem is
that you DON'T get the 3.5 points added from BAYES_99, which is what
should have hit. Even if it got to BAYES_60, you still would have
go
On 06/04/2014 04:36 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
Please keep list messages on the list so everyone can see them. I'm
just another user. Other people may be able to add additional suggestions.
ops..sorry hit the wrong button :-(
The problem isn't that BAYES_00 subtracts 1.9 points. The problem
On 6/4/2014 10:09 AM, Daniele Paoni wrote:
On 06/04/2014 04:01 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
Your Bayes DB is messed up. Spam should never get BAYES_00. Check your
training procedures to make sure that spam is not being accidentally
trained as ham. The best way to fix the problem is to wipe the DB
On 6/4/2014 9:47 AM, Daniele Paoni wrote:
Hello, I'm getting a lot of viagra emails that are not tagged by
spamassassin
I'm using SA version 3.3.2
This is the original message http://pastebin.ca/2794087
This is the result of spamassassin
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.239
X-Spam-Level:
X-Sp
Hello, I'm getting a lot of viagra emails that are not tagged by
spamassassin
I'm using SA version 3.3.2
This is the original message http://pastebin.ca/2794087
This is the result of spamassassin
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.239
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.239 tagged_above=-10
Hi
this is the first spam i have seen with this header
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on
proteus2.obantec.net
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=4.5 tests=none autolearn=failed
version=3.1.3
Subject: Fwd: You Need a Better Degree,{} and we can Help!
b
12 matches
Mail list logo
