Thanks guys, I just trained in 2089 legitimate ham messages, so hopefully that will do the trick. And also thanks to you John, as I didn't even see that URIBL_BLOCKED. I've setup a local recursion DNS server, which seems to have taken care of it. Crossing my fingers that this has a positive impact on things. I'll update after some time has gone by.
- Nick -----Original Message----- From: Reindl Harald [mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net] Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 3:17 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: spamassassin working very poorly Am 03.10.2014 um 21:07 schrieb Nick: > Over the last few months, spamassassin has begun barely working for me spammers also learn > SPAM is so bad that I've actually started training it - which is > something I've never had to do in the past. So I've collected 370+ > e-mails over the last few days, and had sa-learn regularly read in > these messages Training it doesn't seem to have made any impact. if you only train spam samples nothing will happen you need *at least* 200 ham samples to start bayes get used and you really really don't want it any other way because it would kill all your legit mail - the filter needs to know differences and not every single word appeared in the spam-only samples to give a spam score you need to careful floow this: https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BayesInSpamAssassin > X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 > tests=HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST, > HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_ONLY,SPF_PASS,T_REMOTE_IMAGE,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD, > URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 there is no BAYES tag and so it is not used
