From: Chris Barnes <ch...@txbarnes.com> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:14:37 -0500 Jeff Mincy wrote: > Yow. The negative scoring bayes rules are extremely reliable when well > trained. Ham messages are not trying to evade the filter. Defeating > bayes with poison is mostly a myth. The random garbage might work the > first time but not the second time as long as you are training these > messages as spam. If you are getting lots of BAYES_00 hits on spam > then the problem is almost certainly incorrect training where spam > messages were incorrectly learned as ham. Fair enough. But the problem remains. A simple glance at this list shows that this happens often enough to be a fairly common problem. The question is: How does one fix the problem after it occurs?
The way to fix the problem is to relearn any incorrectly learned messages. So any spam message that was incorrectly learned as ham, either automatically or manually, needs to be correctly relearned as spam using sa-learn. You should also learn as spam any spam messages that hits BAYES_00, or anything less than BAYES_50. You should also do the same thing for HAM messages hitting BAYES_50 - BAYES_99. The more messages that you correctly train the more accurate and definitive bayes will be. If you don't have the incorrectly learned messages to retrain then you can always start over by removing the bayes database files in your .spamassassin directory. -jeff
