I think he might also need to restart spamd/amavisd/whatever to have the
local.cf change take place.
--
Kevin A. McGrail
VP Fundraising, Apache Software Foundation
Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171


On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 11:18 AM John Hardin <jhar...@impsec.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 8 Oct 2018, Chuck McManis wrote:
>
> > I have been trying to tune scores to achieve better matches with spam
> that
> > is getting through. And one test which shows up is HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST
> > which is being scored for 0. Doing a scan of my incoming mail flow this
> is
> > a huge signal, perhaps even a disqualifying one as I have yet to find a
> > legitimate piece of email where this is true and it isn't spam.
> >
> > So in my local.cf file I added:
> >
> > score HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST 10
> >
> > To have it add 10 points to the spam score, recompiled rules and
> restarted
> > spamd. Yet it still gives it 0 points.
> >
> > 0.0 HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST BODY: HTML font color similar or identical to
> >                            background
> >
> > How do I change this value?
>
> In your local config file:
>
>    score   HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST   1.000   # or whatever score you prefer
>
>
> The reason it scores so low in the base ruleset is the S/O is *very* low
> in the masscheck corpora - 0.114 - 4% spam hits vs. 31% ham hits.
>
> You might want to be careful if you intend to treat that as a poison pill
> by itself...
>
> I'll take a look at whether its performance can be improved.
>
> --
>   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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Politicians never accuse you of "greed" for wanting other people's
>    money, only for wanting to keep your own money.    -- Joseph Sobran
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>   557 days since the first commercial re-flight of an orbital booster
> (SpaceX)
>

Reply via email to