Re: after months of training still most messages treated as SPAM

[Reindl Harald]

Am 25.01.2015 um 19:30 schrieb Reindl Harald:

Am 25.01.2015 um 19:13 schrieb LuKreme:

On Jan 23, 2015, at 6:55 AM, Wolf Drechsel
<drech...@verkehrsplanung.com> wrote:

2.0 BAYES_50               BODY: Spamwahrscheinlichkeit nach
Bayes-Test: 40-60%

This is incorrect.

Bayes_50 should be scored at about 0.5, or lower

depends on the envirnoment and quality of bayes data

but yes, in context of the subject it's too high, on the other hand
"after months of training" if it is done right there should not be too
much BAYES_50 hits not should the 2.0 points *alone* matter that much

/etc/mail/spamassassin/local-*.cf
  score BAYES_00 -3.5
  score BAYES_05 -1.5
  score BAYES_20 -0.5
  score BAYES_40 -0.2
  score BAYES_50 2.5
  score BAYES_60 3.0
  score BAYES_80 5.0
  score BAYES_95 6.5
  score BAYES_99 7.5
  score BAYES_999 0.4

________________________________________________

grep -c BAYES_00 maillog
33788

grep -c BAYES_05 maillog
655

grep -c BAYES_20 maillog
868

grep -c BAYES_40 maillog
983

grep -c BAYES_50 maillog
6581

grep -c BAYES_60 maillog
702

grep -c BAYES_80 maillog
532

grep -c BAYES_95 maillog
449

grep -c BAYES_99 maillog
2448

grep -c BAYES_999 maillog
2140
________________________________________________

grep -c BAYES_ maillog
47006

to back that with data: the 6581 are just 14% of all messages made it to the content-scanner, BAYES_50 alone is not enough for "most messages treated as SPAM", a large amount of the BAYES_50 messages are indeed junk and correctly rejected in combination with other tags so the OP's *real problem* is what *other tags* besides Bayes hit the affected messages and not a wrong BAYES_50 with only 2.0 points

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature