On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Jonathan Nichols wrote:
> http://www.pbp.net/~jnichols/spam.txt
That's really odd, here it tripped a DATE_IN_PAST rule. Here's the report:
Content analysis details: (12.4 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ----------------------
--------------------------------------------------
5.4 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100%
[score: 1.0000]
1.1 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 BODY: Razor2 gives confidence between 51 and 100
[cf: 100]
1.0 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/)
2.9 DCC_CHECK Listed in DCC
(http://rhyolite.com/anti-spam/dcc/)
0.4 DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 Date: is 3 to 6 hours before Received: date
0.5 LOCAL_DRUGS_MALDYSFUNCTION_OBFU LOCAL_DRUGS_MALDYSFUNCTION_OBFU
1.0 LOCAL_DRUGS_MALEDYSFUNCTION LOCAL_DRUGS_MALEDYSFUNCTION
Of course my Bayes is different, and it has probably been reported to Razor
/ DCC since -- but if you aren't useing those, then you might want to.
==========================================================
Chris Candreva -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- (914) 967-7816
WestNet Internet Services of Westchester
http://www.westnet.com/
-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
