Hello, Do not assume we know which version of SA you are using. This information is really helpful. Do you use Bayes? (is it trained with 200 spam & 200 ham)? Do you use Auto-White List? (Possible reason for your troubles.)
You can fine tune the scores all you like, if you find a test which you feel is worth more, feel free to set the score higher in your local.cf. It explains this inside of that file. Or user_prefs. Your message was not selling anything, not sent from an open relay, etc. In real life, spam has many more points of interest. What do you think SA should be scoring higher? From eyeballing your msg, I can see it hit SUBJ_ALL_CAPS .5 PLING_PLING 1.0 The beauty of SA is the ease of writing your own rules, for example (RTFM) you could add your own meta rule: meta LOCAL_SUBJCAPS_PLING (SUBJ_ALL_CAPS && PLING_PLING) describe LOCAL_SUBJCAPS_PLING Subject is all caps and contains !! score LOCAL_SUBJCAPS_PLING 0.9 This rule would help to catch your (sample spam) message, but it will also cause more false positives. Very few spam I see look like that.. Most of our spam is caught by Network tests, I love net tests! Lots more on adding your own tests at http://www.exit0.us/ SA is very powerful if used correctly, but some of these features are not turned on by default, rather left to the more skilled user turning them on if they want them. Frederic Tarasevicius Internet Information Services, Inc. Mike Klein wrote: > After some dyslexia in running the tests in USAGE (which > passed/failed as they should)... > > I decided to send some really annoying spam to myself. > > Basically email consisted of an all caps subject "INCREASE YOUR PEN*S > SIZE NOW!!!" and several lines in the body with same text and a url > to go to. BTW, I didn't make the above typo in my email...I spelled > the organ part correctly. > > The best I can seem to do on my own is rate a 3.1...with 5 to reject. > > This seems a skosh weak. I mean...let's get real. The subject alone > s/have made the email rate a 5...imho. > > I will look at configuring hit rate lower, but this s/not be > necessary I think. > > Why is the rating system so abysmal? > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Spamassassin-talk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
