On 22/10/12 19:15, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 10/22, JP Kelly wrote:
Should I set the BAYES_99 score high enough to trigger as spam?
I get plenty of spam getting through which does not get caught because BAYES_99
is the only rule which fires and it is not set to score at or above the
threshold.
You could. Some people only use bayesian filtering, which would be
similar. The important question is, how many false positives (non-spams
flagged as spams) would that cause? SpamAssassin's automated scoring
attempts to achieve 1 false positive in 2,500 non-spams, with a score
threshold of 5.0. So if you don't have an absolute minimum of 2,500
representative non-spams to check for having hit BAYES_99, you risk
increasing your false positives. But it's your risk to take.
I have had very good success running adjusted scores for BAYES rules,
but I am very careful how I train my bayes database. I've disabled
auto-learning and only manually train on hand-checked ham and spam
examples. Consequently, I find the extremes (BAYES_99 and BAYES_00) to
be highly reliable indicators.
