Jim
Pierre's scores are similar to mine - what extra rules do you run, do you use surbl.org and any RBL's/pyzor/razor/bayes stuff?
I find you need to add in alot of the SARE rules, surbl, bayes, razor/pyzor to get the setup working well.
-- Martin Hepworth Snr Systems Administrator Solid State Logic Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
Jim Sabatke wrote:
Pierre Thomson wrote:
Martin,
The real egregious spams score up in the 20's and 30's, and the vast majority score over 12. What we review represents only a tiny fraction of the received spam, and some of the "sham" which is hardest to categorize.
Pierre
I keep reading these numbers and they don't reflect my experience. I do get spam with numbers that high, but I have to set mine at about 2.5 to get any useful results. Also, my AOL friends DO get very high scores, especially if they send me pictures with Kodak software that has some advertising built into it.
I also get quite a few FPs and have to sort my spam by hand. Since I'm using amavis to run SA, I don't get SA header info attached to the spam files so I can see what rules are triggering, and it's just way too much work to run a few hundred files throught SA -d everyday.
Does anyone else here feel that they spend more time trying to capture spam than it would take to just delete it by hand?
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager.
This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean.
**********************************************************************
