Hi
I updated to the new release today and rebuildspamdb has ruined my corpus
confidence. Not too happy with that
Sep-11-12 16:26:55 Spam Weight:3,904,196
Sep-11-12 16:26:55 Not-Spam Weight: 1,950,092
Sep-11-12 16:26:55 Corpus norm: 2.0021 - (warning: extremely s
ASSP development mailing list schrei
bt:
>
>From: "Email Marketing"
ASSP shows the envelope sender in the logfile not the "From:".
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today
>ASSP will extract the headers and body and perform
some checks to see if it already "saw" that file
Exactly this way it works for years now - I think we had this topic some
months ago Andrea - how ever, good ideas comes back in mind every time!
:):):).
It must be - because if a mail is reporte
> I'll explain a bit more:
>
> - all folders are processed : "the youngest files first"
> - both error folders are fully processed up to MaxFiles
>
> As the result of processing the first two folders we get a weight
> (spam/ham). Now we know were we are: we have a current weight, a
> wanted we
I'm sorry Andrea - I used the terms a bit confusing.
corpusnorm is not the 100% correct word, if we look at all files in the
corpus - we should better say, the resulting 'norm' of the spamdb and HMM
In the previouse versions the limit was MaxFiles - so if you had more
files in the folders, the
Hello
using 1.9.7.5(0.0.02)
sometime I have a row like this in ASSP log
Sep-11-12 00:21:27 id-34733-03401 66.23.233.107 to: wil...@gl.it Message-Score:
added 46 for Bayesian Probability: 0.99952, total score for this message is now
91;
where the sender email is not specified .
In the email h
> >I see, so, basically, you're saying that the weight reported in the
> "rebuild report" isn't correct ?
> No - the values were correctly shown. But ASSP has used all files (up
> to MaxFiles) even it was better to use some less ( from here or
> there) to get a better corpusnorm.
Hmm... I see n
sorry Fritz,
'autoCorrectCorpus' was there as definition for a wanted corpusnorm - but
with a different mechanism behind
>Target norm is (a+b)/2 .
is now used in addition to the old cleanup mechanism
I think this is what you mean to get a configurable corpusnorm target.
Thomas
Von:"Fr
>I see, so, basically, you're saying that the weight reported in the
"rebuild report" isn't correct ?
No - the values were correctly shown. But ASSP has used all files (up to
MaxFiles) even it was better to use some less ( from here or there) to get
a better corpusnorm.
Thomas
Von:Grayha
Hi all,
fixed in assp 2.2.2 build 12255:
- On some linux platforms we saw a CLIB mistake, which caused an IP
address error in ASSP.
Even on a connected IP-socket, assp was unable to get the connected IP
address from the OS.
This caused unexpected crashes or at least unexpected behavior of
ASSP development mailing list schrei
bt:
>Target norm is (a+b)/2 .
That was not.
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and ho
> Andrea,
Hi there, Thomas, we are on the public list, aren't we :) ?
> your request was very logical.
Well... to tell it all, I reported about such a behavior here and
there, but then, I didn't really pay attention to it... until I was
forced to setup a script, scheduled at intervals, to "tri
>May be you should make the corpusnorm configurable like 0.9.
Was and is 'autoCorrectCorpus'. Target norm is (a+b)/2 .
Von:"Fritz Borgstedt"
An: "ASSP development mailing list" ,
Datum: 11.09.2012 13:44
Betreff:Re: [Assp-test] Antwort: strange ASSP behavior
May be you s
May be you should make the corpusnorm configurable like 0.9.
Lower norms after softer in deciding spam/notspams. I run my installat
ions with a norm of 0.6 to get less false positives.
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
E
Andrea,
your request was very logical. Why is assp not able to produce a fine
corpusnorm/spamdb/HMM, if all information is available and the folders are
full of files?
Had a sleepness night.
I think I've found a way to fix this.
After the error folders are processed, a temporary corpusnorm is
>Do you know the source code, the internals, problems, bugs etc. of the
Perl core and all Perl modules used?
Yes, as long they are published. Without that knowledge ASSP will not
work. And the ASSP source includes several fixes and workarounds for Perl
(version dependend !) and module bugs.
>Yes, the assp code the source of the Perl core and all used modules are much
>larger than the source of any Windows kernel.
I was talking about ASSP code, not the Perl core or any standard CPAN modules.
Do you know the source code, the internals, problems, bugs etc. of the Perl
core and all P
17 matches
Mail list logo
