Am 31.08.2014 um 23:06 schrieb Ian Zimmerman: > On Sun, 31 Aug 2014 12:20:41 +0200, > Axb <axb.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Axb> Bayes scores are *not* set to be a sole indicator of spam/ham. > Axb> They're supposed to be yet another indicator. > > FWIW, I use both Razor and Pyzor, and there are times when they seem to > be just asleep. Or maybe a particular kind of spam defeats their hash > protection methods. Then for some hours I get repeated cases like > Harald's - positive BAYES_999 but nothing much else. It is quite > frustrating.
nope - there is nothing frustrating set the bayes scores higher if you trust them, i am starring for some hours on my maillogs and without Razor and Pyzor the results are *impressing* in comination with postscreen and PTR-checks and SA as last defense there comes 1 out of 1000 delivery attempts to a user, as far as i see no false positives and a handful of spam makes it through - trying to eliminate that would introduce false positives which is odd after 8 years using a commercial spamfirewall which also useses SA within a lot of other *real crap* and after switch a domain with some thousand valid RCPT i hold my breath and ask myself why i did not do that switch long ago
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
