> "Covington, Chris" wrote: >> >> On my site DCC hits approximately 20% of False Positives also (that is, >> of the 1-2% of false positives, 20% have Razor hits), so don't give it >> too much weight. Razor2 is the worse for that (50% of false >> positives)... but I've weighted my scoring accordingly. > > Setting logic_method=5 in razor_agent.conf might help: > > http://www.geocrawler.com/archives/3/2539/2002/11/0/10224077/ > > As you say, you can adjust when dcc hits, but if it's because of bulk > and/or list mail, you could white list, or bypass filtering it. That > is, why are you getting false positives with DCC?
Just a bit of a "me too" post, I checked my last two days email including Ham and Spam and checked the hitrate of DCC and RAZOR2 and here were the results: Ham: 0 DCC hits, 1 RAZOR2 hit out of 203 Ham messages. Spam: 174 DCC hits, 57 RAZOR2 hits out of 242 Spam messages. And out of the total message sample there weren't any FP's or FN's.... Interesting that DCC is triggering on about 71% of my Spam, far higher than I might have guessed. Meanwhile RAZOR2 hit on only 23% of Spam. I didn't check the overlap between the two. (Since it requires more than a simple search/grep and I can't be bothered ;) Regards, Simon ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
