On 12 March 2002, Marsha Hanchrow said:
> Some of it was identifiable text, and just too tempting. OK, it's
> deleted. But what does one do when SA comes to a wrong conclusion? When
> it adds the sender of a piece of junk that it didn't catch to the
> auto-whitelist, there must be some way to remove it. Otherwise, it
> "thinks" it's right, and then just about guarantees that further junk
> mailings will get through.
Which version of SA are you using? Auto-whitelisting was waaaay too
simplistic in 2.0, and most people just disabled it for exactly the
reason you cite. Craig came up with a clever-sounding algorithm for
2.1, but I don't have much experience of it yet myself.
Can anyone give real-world results for AWL in SA 2.1 yet?
> I did change a few in user_prefs, but have seen no indication they are
> being used. Since I mostly changed the negative scores for some positive
> attributes, I don't get to see detail on them, just the total score when a
> message gets through. I'll change some of the scores for phrases that
> definitely get caught, just to assure myself that I've got some control.
Pipe your message through "spamassassin -t" to see a full report
regardless of how spammy it is.
If you're using spamc/spamd (and you should be, for efficiency
reasons!), note that spamd doesn't always see your user_prefs file. It
usually boils down to a permissions problem. Running "spamd -D" might
help clarify things.
Greg
--
Greg Ward - software developer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MEMS Exchange http://www.mems-exchange.org
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
