This has come up on the list before, but... Looking at my most recent network run:
OVERALL SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME
0 460740 21564 0.955 0.00 0.00 (all messages)
0.00000 95.5290 4.4710 0.955 0.00 0.00 (all messages as %)
74.714 78.1593 1.1130 0.986 0.78 0.00 URIBL_BLACK
a 1.1% FP rate is very bad IMO. SURBL is < 0.1%, for comparison.
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 04:55:57PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Of the fair amount of false negatives that get through, more than 90% of
> them appear to hit on URIBL_BLACK. I have incrementally increased it
> recently to a score of 5.0 (I hit on 6.0). The stuff that's still getting
> through seems to be hitting on only URIBL_BLACK.
>
> I am very tempted to bump the score of it to 6.0 or higher, as it would
> drastically reduce spam, but I'd like to get any false positive feedback
> on doing that first. I haven't seen any so far, but I figure others must
> be doing this.
--
Randomly Selected Tagline:
"... the Saab company didn't report a slight problem with the Saab 9000
cars. The Saabs have a problem with the wiring which causes the engine
to fail, and the power windows and door locks to stop working. The car then
fills with smoke pouring from the dashboard, and then may explode."
- From Headline News
pgpKVoWgQZcdo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
