On Wed, 13 Jun 2018, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 12.06.18 19:37, micah anderson wrote:
2.3 EMPTY_MESSAGE Message appears to have no textual parts and no
Subject:
It did not have a subject, but it did have content (although only
encrypted).... it also hit:
* 1.8 MISSING_SUBJECT Missing Subject: header
which makes sense, because the mail did not have one, but have you
looked in your Spam folder lately? All spam has a subject, pretty much
always.... an informal survey of my trash heap showed 4 messages out of
400 did not have a Subject, and two of them were repeats.
and what is your point?
MISSING_SUBJECT is here because when message has no Subject:, it is highly
probably spam.
it's useless to count how many of spams hit the rule. there are many rules
who hit only small percentage of spam, but all of them hit most of spam.
what is important is:
- how much of mails hitting MISSING_SUBJECT is spam
- how much of mails hitting MISSING_SUBJECT is ham.
if the percentage is very different in there two cases, the rule gets high
positive (or negative) score.
S/O = .826
http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20180613-r1833448-n/MISSING_SUBJECT/detail
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhar...@impsec.org FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
As a Turkish general once remarked, the trouble with having the
Americans as friends is that you can never be sure when they will
turn around and stab themselves in the back. -- Bernard Lewis
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
5 days until SWMBO's Birthday
