On Wed, 2007-04-18 at 10:23 -0500, Craig Carriere wrote: > Robert: > > It sounds like your problem rests with your bayes database. Some SA > rules will fire on almost all mail, but a properly trained bayes filter > should be able to reduce your scores to under your spam threshold. None > of these scores rate out very aggressively so I am surprised that these > are pushing you over your spam threshold. How have you trained bayes > with you spam and ham mail? Also I think that the default SA setting of > 200 spam and 200 ham is a little low and do not regard bayes as truly > effective until about 1000 message of each kind are learned. That being > said I would, and have, reduced the default score for Botnet from 5.0 to > 3.0. Also, if your run the 00_ version of Fred's rules note that many > of them are very aggressively scored. I personally do not let any rule > score at over 3.0, except some network test, to allow bayes to recover > the mail from listing as a FP. >
Thanks, we are rebuilding bayes and now have in SQL with auto learn on, is that good? Now has over 25K spam, but just 180 ham. I have plenty of ham on my own, is it going to effect it all coming from just a few different addresses if I learn all my own ham? -- Robert
