On 6 Nov 2015, at 1:52, Matthias Apitz wrote:
El día Thursday, November 05, 2015 a las 04:24:04PM +0100, John
Wilcock escribió:
Le 05/11/2015 15:54, Matthias Apitz a écrit :
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
c720-r276659
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Level: **************************************************
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=1000.0 required=3.0
tests=GTUBE,NO_RECEIVED,
NO_RELAYS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
X-Spam-Report: ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
* 1000 GTUBE BODY: Generic Test for Unsolicited Bulk Email
* -0.0 NO_RELAYS Informational: message was not relayed via
SMTP
* -0.0 NO_RECEIVED Informational: message has no Received
* headers
...
Why auto-learn wants the mail as HAM?
Because autolearning ignores rules with the noautolearn, userconf or
learn tflags set (and uses the scores from scoreset 0 or 1).
...
Thanks for all explanations. I now have a better understanding of the
autolearning process. Please, can someone forward me off-list (gzip'ed
with
complete header lines) a SPAM which resulted in autolearn=spam.
You may have a long wait for that...
A lot of mail systems do not retain mail that is determined to be spam
or even accept delivery of it. Since the autolearn threshold (at least
by default) is generally much higher than the simple spam threshold,
even sites that accept and deliver spam (i.e. tagged or to a spam
mailbox) often don't bother keeping spam scoring so high.
Beyond that, many people who do retain spam (e.g. for analytic purposes)
are averse to sharing their data. There is a long history of spamtraps
and fingerprints becoming useless soon after behind shared with
seemingly trustworthy audiences.
