Hi, I'm wondering ... this is spam right or ? Its score like this here: 1.5 RCVD_IN_SPAMCANNIBAL RBL: www.spamcannibal.org [72.55.156.38 listed in bl.spamcannibal.org] 1.8 BARRACUDA_BRBL RBL: Listed: Barracuda Reputation Block List (BRBL) [72.55.156.38 listed in b.barracudacentral.org] 3.1 RCVD_IN_JMF_BL RBL: Sender listed in JMF-BLACK [72.55.156.38 listed in hostkarma.junkemailfilter.com] -0.1 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record -0.1 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.4996] 2.2 DCC_CHECK Listed in DCC (http://rhyolite.com/anti-spam/dcc/)
so ... spam too me ... But what are you complaning that it hits BAYES_99 ... thats good if its spam. mvh On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:03 AM, LuKreme <krem...@kreme.com> wrote: > <http://home.kreme.com/ephspam.txt> > > Gotten a few like this in the last day or two. I have no idea why they are > hitting Bayes_99. > > The account in question runs untagged spam through sa-learn pretty > frequently (at least once a week, sometimes more). > > $ sa-learn --dump magic > 0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db version > 0.000 0 32600 0 non-token data: nspam > 0.000 0 83822 0 non-token data: nham > 0.000 0 152918 0 non-token data: ntokens > 0.000 0 1227138323 0 non-token data: oldest atime > 0.000 0 1232419321 0 non-token data: newest atime > 0.000 0 1232396013 0 non-token data: last journal sync > atime > 0.000 0 1232396040 0 non-token data: last expiry atime > 0.000 0 0 0 non-token data: last expire atime > delta > 0.000 0 0 0 non-token data: last expire > reduction count > > The nspam/nham numbers are ok, aren't they? I supposed I could run more > messages at nham? > > -- > Advance and attack! Attack and destroy! Destroy and rejoice! > >