OK, fair-enough, and your theory seems very valid. I wish they (Cloudmark) made a SA plugin for us SOHO users that can't afford (and don't need) a full Cloudmark Authority server/setup. I'd pay a license fee if it were reasonable and it performed anywhere near as accurately as their windows desktop product.
Guess I'll go add-in DCC as well (Pyzor already also included). Thanks for the response. -AJ Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > > On 1/5/2012 8:49 AM, AJ Weber wrote: >> Yes, I still have other rules enabled. I have found the Cloudmark >> product to >> be extremely accurate, and really my question is specific to whether >> "razor >> == cloudmark" or to what extent they are related and how, so I can better >> understand the results I'm seeing. > From my perspective, Cloudmark is an overall anti-spam solution whereas > Razor is a single score in the anti-spam framework. > > Cloudmark likely uses their "/Cloudmark Collaborative Security Network/" > which is what Razor queries as well. However, for Cloudmark, the CCSN > query is just one part of their framework for testing messages if I had > to make a slightly educated guess. > > The first step is getting SA's framework built. Then you start looking > at tweaking and adding things that improve the framework. Cloudmark has > likely done this for you so comparing Cloudmark to Razor is apples to > oranges. A framework can't be compared to one test. > > There are lots of things that can use the framework of SA from > content-based heuristic tests to pathway analysis via DNSBLs to even > things like OCR checks on images. > > Hope this helps. > > Regards, > KAM > > > > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/razor2-and-cloudmark--tp33082922p33086300.html Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
