I don't want to knock Alligate, it has some nice functionality,
especially when used without Declude (auto whitelisting and digest
notification), and it does what it says, but it has a relatively high
false positive rate in the default configuration and therefore it can't
be scored higher
À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Objet : Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Alligate vs. Message Sniffer...opinions?
John,
I just joined the list today, but I found your configuration file from
back in June and it was very helpful in understanding how to fine tune
Alligate. I'm going to study it's logs more closely
Message sniffer is not so bad as I tested it but have a big problem
with News letter it has a bif False positive rate with them.
On the home page for MessageSniffer you'll find a Help (QA) section which
is worth your time to read if it's worth your time to implement.
Submit false positives to:
part de
|Matthew Bramble Envoyé : jeudi 21 août 2003 03:32 À :
|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: [Declude.JunkMail]
|Alligate vs. Message Sniffer...opinions?
|
|
|John,
|
|I just joined the list today, but I found your configuration file from
|back in June and it was very helpful in understanding
We use both. Between them, plus the Declude tests, our false positive level
is very, very low.
Our scoring is such that if an e-mail triggers both Sniffer and Alligate, we
treat as spam. If it triggers both, and has other characteristics of spam,
its score is high enough that it gets deleted
Rob,
If you don't mind sharing, what config settings do you use for
Alligate..
Keith
-Original Message-
From: Robert Grosshandler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 5:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Alligate vs. Message Sniffer
As one of the earlier testers and helped develop the variable scale of
Alligate, I can understand your position. I have a client that gets a lot of
e-mail from the Far East and a lot of bcc broadcasts and lists. Many of
these show elements of spam, but are legit. That is what makes it hard.
There
Glad to. By the way, we also use Autowhite (I hate the thought of missing
any mail). Also, our Declude config is near-stock, we hold on 20, delete on
30.
#Alligate for IMail CONFIGURATION FILE (MINIMUM CONFIGURATION)
#PLEASE SEE THE CONFIGURATION INSTRUCTIONS FOR MORE OPTIONS
#GENERAL NOTES
#
I'd also like to share my configuration. We have about 50 E-mail
domains with about 250 users, with many addresses listed in who-is
records and on Web sites, along with nobody alias redirection for all
domains. This results in a lot of garbage coming our way. We are
definitely capturing
John,
I just joined the list today, but I found your configuration file from
back in June and it was very helpful in understanding how to fine tune
Alligate. I'm going to study it's logs more closely before I start that
phase though, looking for false positives. I've turned that test down
At 10:31 PM 8/20/2003 -0400, you wrote:
snip
I don't want to knock Alligate, it has some nice functionality, especially
when used without Declude (auto whitelisting and digest notification), and
it does what it says, but it has a relatively high false positive rate in
the default
Hi Matt, I guess I'll chime in here...
On 08/20/03 10:31pm you wrote...
I just joined the list today, but I found your configuration file from
back in June and it was very helpful in understanding how to fine tune
Alligate. I'm going to study it's logs more closely before I start that
phase
12 matches
Mail list logo
