Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote on Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:56:33 -0400:

Well, like I said, we had big problems using anything in Botnet except
nordns.

That's why everything except the main BOTNET is set to 0 I guess ;-) You have to check for yourself if it fits or not. I just enabled a few (using a score of 1.) and lowered the main BOTNET score from 5.0 to 2.0. I think 5 is much too high as a default, this should be changed. Or maybe it's deliberate, so people don't just drop the files on their system without reading botnet.txt and botnet.variants.txt :-)

It's deliberately a 5.0 because the purpose is to flag all such messages for human review/quarantine (and there's a small assumption there that no rational human being is trashing or rejecting messages at a score in the range of 5 to 6, or even 5 to 10). Botnet isn't so much saying "This message is SPAM!!!", as it is saying "This message requires human review".


Over the last 9 months, my observation has been that, on a million-ish message per day system:

1) aprox. 1% of Botnet marked messages are false positives

2) you can reduce false positives from Botnet by 66% by just dropping the score to 4.99, because the vast majority of false positives are scoring in the range 5 <= score < 5.01

3) you can eliminate the false positives entirely by setting the score to 4.0, because all of the false positives we've come across were in the range 5.0 <= score < 6 (actually, smaller than 6, but definitely 6 works there).

And, anecdotally, while I'm going to keep using the 5.0 score at home, at work the campus email teem has decided to lower it to 4.0 for now (as soon as our change management process approves the change), and possibly adjust it back up toward 4.9 or 4.99 if that's letting through too many low scoring spam messages. (my suggestion was 4.99 and further adjust downward as necessary, but the group decided to go to 4.0 now and adjust back up if necessary)

Reply via email to