On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 08:26:43AM -0500, Joe Flowers wrote:
> For us, SA *seems* to score SPAM messages with lower and lower hit
> scores as time goes by, and the users get more and more glassy-eyed over
> it's ("my" if you prefer) effectiveness as time goes by too.
OH, interesting, I think I had the same effect with a
GLOBAL bayes database deteriorating slowly
(being slowly poisoned, I assumed).
I have two completely identical servers, one *working*
as virus-, the other as spam-filter (so both can be switched
to do both, if one breaks).
But only the 'actualy running spamfilter' has the
'actual/current' bayes database.
Testing the same new/undetected spam gave me slowly decreasing
Values on the 'learning' and 'nearly the same(*)' values on
the 'not-learning' machine! (* both hosts get my updated configs,
so values changed anyway).
I simply dropped the 'rotten' bayes database and the problem
went away ... I'm waiting what comes up now ...
(does your subject ipmply the poison to work monthly?)
Stucki
--
Christoph von Stuckrad * * |nickname |<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>\
Freie Universitaet Berlin |/_*|'stucki' |Tel(days):+49 30 838-75 459|
Fachbereich Mathematik, EDV|\ *|if online|Tel(else):+49 30 77 39 6600|
Arnimallee 2-6/14195 Berlin* * |on IRCnet|Fax(alle):+49 30 838-75454/
