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!
>
>
