Hi, ok, these are good reasons, I see. But I wrote a script setting all recipients of outgoing mails on the whitelist. So everyone I send a message to will be on the whitelist. Meanwhile nearly all people I have contact to are on my whitelist so there are almost no mails I receive which will be automatically learned as ham.
Another thing regarding to your answer Matt: Why don't create a rule scoring say with 0.8 points if there is only one recipients address and that one equals the senders address but they have different 'name parts'? Like: TO: "User Name" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FROM: "viargre offer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There are a lot of spam mails with that structure trying to get through because many people have their own domain on the whitelist. I tried to set this up as rule but with no luck. I fear it is not possible to do with an regular expression. Harry > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 7:19 AM > To: Sidney Markowitz > Cc: Harald Binkle; '[email protected]' > Subject: Re: shortcircuit for USER_IN_WHITELIST --> noautolearn?? > ==>learn! > > Sidney Markowitz wrote: > > Harald Binkle wrote, On 7/5/08 1:33 AM: > >> Hi, I just wondered why my bayes filter does not learn as much ham > >> mails as before. Then I realized that the USER_IN_WHITELIST > >> shortcirciut is set to spam which has tflags > >> noautoloearn. Does this really make sense? > > > > The rationale is that you put an address on the whitelist when they > > might send mail that looks like spam but you know it is really ham. > If > > it looks like spam, you don't want the Bayes filter to learn that it > > is ham, because from anyone else it would be spam. > > Another reason not to do so is the frequency with which people > mis-configure their whitelists. > > If you mistakenly whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED], as many people have > done when first setting up SA, your DNS database will be poisoned > rather > quickly if it allows such messages to autolearn. > &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& > -----Original Message----- > From: Sidney Markowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 10:41 PM > To: Harald Binkle > Cc: '[email protected]' > Subject: Re: shortcircuit for USER_IN_WHITELIST --> noautolearn?? > ==>learn! > > Harald Binkle wrote, On 7/5/08 1:33 AM: > > Hi, I just wondered why my bayes filter does not learn as much ham > mails as before. > > Then I realized that the USER_IN_WHITELIST shortcirciut is set to > spam which has tflags > > noautoloearn. Does this really make sense? > > The rationale is that you put an address on the whitelist when they > might send mail that > looks like spam but you know it is really ham. If it looks like spam, > you don't want the > Bayes filter to learn that it is ham, because from anyone else it would > be spam. > > Of course, someone on your whitelist can also send mail that looks like > ham. The Bayes > filter can't learn anything one way or the other from that mail, so it > is sent to noautolearn. > > -- sidney ---------------------------------------------------- JAM Software GmbH Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Joachim Marder Bruchhausenstr. 1 * 54290 Trier * Germany Tel: 0700-70707050 * Fax: 0700-70707059 (max. 12,4 ct/min, Preise aus Mobilfunknetzen k?nnen abweichen) Handelsregister Nr. HRB 4920 (AG Wittlich) http://www.jam-software.de
