On Sunday, November 10 2013, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > On Sun, 2013-11-10 at 03:32 -0200, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: >> On Sunday, November 10 2013, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > >> For all messages that I received since I started using SA (about 20 >> messages, of which 5 were false-negatives, and the rest were >> true-negatives), [...] > > Given you state below no spam has been identified yet, you're confusing > terms. > > SA tests for spam. Thus a positive result is "classified spam", and "not > spam" is a negative test result. True means the result is correct, > whereas false indicates a mis-classification by the test. > > False (mis-classified) negatives (rated not-spam) are spam, which SA > failed to classify spam.
I don't think I am confusing terms. false-negative: spam that got classified as ham false-positive: ham that got classified as spam true-negative: ham true-positive: spam Maybe my terms aren't the correct ones, and if that's the case, sorry about it. > If you prefer, refer to them as missed spam, or (in)correctly classified > ham and spam. OK, I will make use of those terms if it makes things clearer for you. >> I do receive spam. About 1 or 2 per day. But so far SA hasn't been >> able to catch any of them, and all spam I receive has been marked as ham >> so far. The message headers are OK, there is nothing apparently wrong >> with SA, but it is just not catching most of my spam. I assume this is >> normal behavior since I just started using SA a few days ago. > > No, that is not normal. In fact, since no spam has been identified at > all yet, there is something really broken or mis-configured. Indeed, no spam has been classified at all since I started running SA. An interesting fact is that, before I started using SA, I had some spams left in my INBOX. Well, when I decided that it was time to use SA, I manually fed those spams to spamc (for testing purposes), and SA correctly identified almost all of them! But now, as I said, SA is failing to classify the spam I've been receiving. > I suggest to start a new thread (no reply) about this. For starters, > we'd need details about your environment and how you set up SA. Plus > some X-Spam-Status headers of ham and (missed) spam. OK, fair enough. Unfortunately, I don't have any spam messages left. I used them all to feed sa-learn, and then deleted them. But as soon as I get another misclassified spam, I will start another thread on this topic, with all the information requested (BTW, I am using a default Debian SA configuration, and did not modify anything so far). Thanks, -- Sergio
