Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 18:45 +0100, Jeremy Morton wrote:
Here's another e-mail that got through SpamAssassin:

http://rafb.net/p/cFMnIy61.html

Backscatter. These types of arbitrarily phrased "I changed my email
address" auto-responses are pretty much impossible to catch.

I feared as much.

As you can see I've effectively disabled the BAYES_00 rule as it's
giving false credit to a ton of backscatter crud messages, but is there

Since BAYES_00 is a strong sign for ham, I would have at least given it
a low negative score, not positive. This is particular important, since
you severely lowered the required_score to a mere 3.0.

It may be a strong sign for ham, but it's also giving way too much credit to a lot of spam (or at least unwanted backscatter) I'm getting that would otherwise be rejected. I'll move it to -0.1 but I don't want it being a strong indicator of ham.

Moreover, this is not spam. Thus I recommend you pretty much ignore the
Bayes score here. Don't change the rule's score based on backscatter,
but ham and spam hits, if need be.

It's unwanted e-mail, so it's pretty close to spam in my book. Just because it's some moron who bounced a message instead of someone explicitly spamming me doesn't make it much better.

really a way to block these kinds of backscatter?  Is my Bayesian
filtering screwed up?  What score does your SA install give for this
message?

Your Bayes *might* be skewed. Hard to tell from that sample. Do you
train it, manually? Would Spanish be a language you do get in ham?

No and no. But all the character glyphs in the message could be used in English or French which I might get ham messages in, so it can't be ruled out on those grounds.

Also, again -- you are suffering from your catch-all!  See my previous
post (in one of your various threads) for some thoughts regarding this.

Yeah, I'm the greatest lamenter of my decision to catch-all years ago, but there's really no realistic way I'm gonna be able to go back on that. I've probably registered with various sites using over 100 usernames now. I'm just gonna have to live with that.

Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)

Reply via email to