Sure, send it to me as an attachment.
Loren
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Machado" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <users@spamassassin.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 5:56 AM
Subject: detection rate decrease (?)
I have no idea what is happening to my SA installation. I even
installed on another server and I'm getting the same results.
Can I send somebody a piece of mail that is getting only 4.458 hits (it
should get more than that! )
Please help me !
Thanks.
Juan Machado
Manager, Technology Solutions Division
ITOS - Carl Vinson Institute of Government
The University of Georgia
-----Original Message-----
From: Loren Wilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2005 9:57 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: V3.0.2 vs. 2.63 detection rate decrease (?)
First off I'd make sure you ran lint to see if you still have any old
2.6x options in your 3.0 config. That seems to have happened to a lot
of people, and can screw things up.
In general 3.0.4 seems to be better than 2.64, which was the expected
end goal. The earlier 3.0 and 3.0.x releases had some assorted
problems/annoyances. Perhaps the worst of these was the low score
assigned to bayes_99 that made it near useless.
I would upgrade your new 3.0.2 installation to 3.0.4. I believe that
3.0.2 has a known DOS vunerability. Also, the bayes_99 score has been
fixed in 3.0.4, as have several other things.
If you are using SARE rules, make sure to check them. Several rule
files need to change when going from 2.6x to 3.0.x.
With all of the above done, you really should be getting better
detection on
3.0.4 than on 2.64.
The only thing that seems to be happening that causes some FNs for some
people is if you have user rules. Occasionally you will see an
'insecure dependency' line in your log, and this will usually correspond
to a spam that slips through without getting scored. YOu should look at
the FNs you have been getting and see if they have SA scores, or if they
made it through unscored.
Loren
