On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, RW wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 13:58:03 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, Steve wrote:
b) Configure spamc -C report (run as any user) to initiate
training of the amavis bayes database (in ~amavis/.spamassassin) ?
That would probably be a code change
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 13:58:03 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, Steve wrote:
> > b) Configure spamc -C report (run as any user) to initiate
> > training of the amavis bayes database (in ~amavis/.spamassassin) ?
>
> That would probably be a code chang
Am 25.02.2016 um 22:58 schrieb John Hardin:
b) Configure spamc -C report (run as any user) to initiate training
of the amavis bayes database (in ~amavis/.spamassassin) ?
That would probably be a code change, unless you want to write a wrapped
script that calls the real spamc and then sa
;t working - and autolearn became
self-reinforcing as a result. I had been misinterpreting my logs
(face-palm)! I now see that the training initiated by spamc (behind
dovecot antispam) was trying to train the bayes database in
~/.spamassassin/bayes* - but amavis was using the bayes database i
yes, so I would say that autolearn is
probably the cause of this behavior.
Note that the bayes score doesn't contribute to the autolearning
decision to avoid positive feedback, but if there are no non-Bayes
spam signs and the message scores lightly negative like that one does,
it can be le
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 00:41:04 +
Steve wrote:
> On 24/02/2016 22:59, John Hardin wrote:
> > How do you train your Bayes? Autolearn? General user submissions?
> > Trusted user submissions? Only you, from only your personal mail?
> Only my personal mailbox *really* matte
positive spam) with the result of purge the whole
bayes (commercial appliance using SpamAssassin as one part)
after build up my own spamfilter solution, keep the whole corpus and
*only* train by hand with no autlearning/autoexpire the bayes is 100%
trustworthy and can be scored as nearly po
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, Reindl Harald wrote:
7.0 URIBL_BLACKContains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist
[URIs: leslie-bib***b.org]
That, too. Steve, you might consider boosting your local score for
URIBL_BLACK. :)
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ
y the cause of this behavior.
Note that the bayes score doesn't contribute to the autolearning decision
to avoid positive feedback, but if there are no non-Bayes spam signs and
the message scores lightly negative like that one does, it can be learned
as ham. That would make any subsequent sim
net]
3.0 INVESTMENT_ADVICE BODY: Message mentions investment advice
1.5 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
[score: 0.5002]
0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signa
itives all match BAYES_00 - attracting a default score
of -1.9. BAYES_00 seems to be at the crux of the misclassification.
Is there a way to delve into why these messages have been allocated
such a low bayes score - while (to a human) appearing blatant,
simple, spam on "vanilla" spam t
The false positives all match BAYES_00 - attracting a default score of
-1.9. BAYES_00 seems to be at the crux of the misclassification.
Is there a way to delve into why these messages have been allocated such a
low bayes score - while (to a human) appearing blatant, simple, spam on
"vanilla&quo
cts.
* The emails consist fairly plain HTML and appear not to employ any
significant obfuscation.
* I have tried to train spamassassin with many of these spam samples -
without any effect.
* The bayes database is updated. The bayes_journal (37k), bayes_seen
(5.2mb) and bayes_toks (5.4mb) files all h
John Hardin wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2016, Kris Deugau wrote:
>
>> In general though, if you're operating at a scale where one server isn't
>> enough to handle your SA load, you may want to start thinking about SQL
>> for Bayes, which can be shared much more easil
estions. Just to confirm
that in the end I decided not to mess too much with a working system and
didn't upgrade to db48 on the older system. I went down the route of
backing up and restoring the bayes database using sa-learn - which
worked perfectly fine.
There is still the question of
On 13/02/16 18:58, Bill Cole wrote:
On 13 Feb 2016, at 3:49, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
Thank you. The donor machine has db42, db44 and db44 packages installed,
Based on the question below, I'll assume the second db44 above was a
typo for db48, i.e. a Berkeley DB v4.8.x package.
Yes - sorry, y
On 13 Feb 2016, at 3:49, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
Thank you. The donor machine has db42, db44 and db44 packages
installed,
Based on the question below, I'll assume the second db44 above was a
typo for db48, i.e. a Berkeley DB v4.8.x package.
Tangentially: that's a risky mess. It's a common pr
ation
database to the customer, for use on their own machines.
Sounds perfectly reasonable to share this as a commercial service, to me
that's exactly what happens, fetch the bayes over a webservice when the
checksum has changed - nobody on both sides want to use redis for a
million reasons
On Saturday 13 February 2016 at 16:50:56, Reindl Harald wrote:
> a different company with it's own infrastructure has no business to
> ssh-tunneling or access *my server* in any other way directly
>
> DIFFERENT NETWORKS
> DIFFERENT INFRASTRUCTURES
> DIFFERENT OWNERS
> DIFFERENT ADMINS
>
> NO DIR
in your infrastructure but it won't work in the cases we
have in real life where another company with independent
infrastructure fetchs our bayes in context of a subscription over
webservices, move the files in a temp-folder and train own samples
before replace the local bayes with the result
use Redis when it comes to different servers in different
networks for different clients
BDB works fine and relieable, at least without autolearning and
autoexpire and having the bayes-db path read-only for the running
spamd with namespaces
0 60388SPAM
0 21651HAM
02510401T
rs in different
networks for different clients
BDB works fine and relieable, at least without autolearning and
autoexpire and having the bayes-db path read-only for the running
spamd with namespaces
0 60388SPAM
0 21651HAM
02510401TOKEN
insgesamt 73M
-rw--- 1 sa-milt s
nts
BDB works fine and relieable, at least without autolearning and
autoexpire and having the bayes-db path read-only for the running
spamd with namespaces
0 60388SPAM
0 21651HAM
02510401TOKEN
insgesamt 73M
-rw--- 1 sa-milt sa-milt 10M 2016-02-13 09:12 bayes_seen
DB (Hash, version 9, native byte-order)
On the receiver machine, but with bayes files created locally:
#file bayes_seen
bayes_seen: Berkeley DB (Hash, version 8, native byte-order)
# file bayes_toks
bayes_toks: Berkeley DB (Hash, version 8, native byte-order)
Could the hash version account for
t least without autolearning and
autoexpire and having the bayes-db path read-only for the running spamd
with namespaces
0 60388SPAM
0 21651HAM
02510401TOKEN
insgesamt 73M
-rw--- 1 sa-milt sa-milt 10M 2016-02-13 09:12 bayes_seen
-rw--- 1 sa-milt sa-milt 81M 2
Am 13.02.2016 um 02:46 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
On 12. feb. 2016 20.06.52 Marc Perkel wrote:
# ls -l /var/spool/spamd/bayes/
Set bayes path without bayes
why do you always give wrong advises?
https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/SiteWideBayesSetup
Note that the argument to bayes_path is
)
On the receiver machine, but with bayes files created locally:
#file bayes_seen
bayes_seen: Berkeley DB (Hash, version 8, native byte-order)
# file bayes_toks
bayes_toks: Berkeley DB (Hash, version 8, native byte-order)
Could the hash version account for the errors I am seeing?
Absolutely
For what it's worth - just used Redis. Redis is the only thing that's
worked reliably for me.
On 12. feb. 2016 20.06.52 Marc Perkel wrote:
# ls -l /var/spool/spamd/bayes/
Set bayes path without bayes
bayes: cannot open bayes databases /var/spool/spamd/bayes/bayes_* R/W:
Remove bayes from local.cf
Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com
On 12/02/16 21:40, Kris Deugau wrote:
Sebastian Arcus wrote:
On 12/02/16 20:31, Antony Stone wrote:
On Friday 12 February 2016 at 17:29:23, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases on
several different servers running SA. On one of the
On 12/02/16 21:40, Kris Deugau wrote:
Sebastian Arcus wrote:
On 12/02/16 20:31, Antony Stone wrote:
On Friday 12 February 2016 at 17:29:23, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases on
several different servers running SA. On one of the
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016, Kris Deugau wrote:
In general though, if you're operating at a scale where one server isn't
enough to handle your SA load, you may want to start thinking about SQL
for Bayes, which can be shared much more easily than pushing file-based
Bayes data around.
Or Re
Am 12.02.2016 um 22:40 schrieb Kris Deugau:
In general though, if you're operating at a scale where one server isn't
enough to handle your SA load, you may want to start thinking about SQL
for Bayes, which can be shared much more easily than pushing file-based
Bayes data around
that case ignore my last post, which assumed it was an SElinux
problem.
Could the problem be down to differing versions of the bayes database
manager? If so, it may be worth letting SA set up an empty Bayes
database and using the backup tool to make a backup on the source
system in a version-agnostic f
Sebastian Arcus wrote:
> On 12/02/16 20:31, Antony Stone wrote:
>> On Friday 12 February 2016 at 17:29:23, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
>>
>>> As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases on
>>> several different servers running SA. On one of the
hich assumed it was an SElinux
problem.
Could the problem be down to differing versions of the bayes database
manager? If so, it may be worth letting SA set up an empty Bayes
database and using the backup tool to make a backup on the source
system in a version-agnostic format, e.g as a CSV file, and th
On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 15:49 -0500, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> On 2/12/2016 3:45 PM, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
> > On 12/02/16 20:31, Antony Stone wrote:
> > > On Friday 12 February 2016 at 17:29:23, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
> > >
> > > > As per advice from t
On 12/02/16 20:49, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 2/12/2016 3:45 PM, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
On 12/02/16 20:31, Antony Stone wrote:
On Friday 12 February 2016 at 17:29:23, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes
databases on
several different servers running
On 2/12/2016 3:45 PM, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
On 12/02/16 20:31, Antony Stone wrote:
On Friday 12 February 2016 at 17:29:23, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes
databases on
several different servers running SA. On one of the servers though, the
On 12/02/16 20:31, Antony Stone wrote:
On Friday 12 February 2016 at 17:29:23, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases on
several different servers running SA. On one of the servers though, the
database is not accepted.
Are the servers all
Am 12.02.2016 um 21:31 schrieb Antony Stone:
On Friday 12 February 2016 at 17:29:23, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases on
several different servers running SA. On one of the servers though, the
database is not accepted.
Are the
On Friday 12 February 2016 at 17:29:23, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
> As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases on
> several different servers running SA. On one of the servers though, the
> database is not accepted.
Are the servers all the same distro, release an
issions I would look at the
directories.
see previous mail - that was already verified
looking closer "No such file or directory" is not a permission problem
there was a hint "please re-run with -D"
at least re-use bayes on different servers, even over different
operating
see previous mail - that was already verified
looking closer "No such file or directory" is not a permission problem
there was a hint "please re-run with -D"
at least re-use bayes on different servers, even over different
operating systems is no problem, or bayes is runni
:
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases
on several different servers running SA. On one of the servers though,
the database is not accepted. I re-transferred them several times over
ssh, to make sure they were not corrupted. The database files are in
the correct
On 12/02/16 16:59, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 12.02.2016 um 17:29 schrieb Sebastian Arcus:
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases on
several different servers running SA. On one of the servers though, the
database is not accepted. I re-transferred them several
On 12/02/16 16:59, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 12.02.2016 um 17:29 schrieb Sebastian Arcus:
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases on
several different servers running SA. On one of the servers though, the
database is not accepted. I re-transferred them several
Am 12.02.2016 um 17:29 schrieb Sebastian Arcus:
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases on
several different servers running SA. On one of the servers though, the
database is not accepted. I re-transferred them several times over ssh,
to make sure they were not
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
# ls -l /var/spool/spamd/bayes/
total 5912
-rw-rw-rw- 1 spamd spamd 1310720 2016-02-09 08:42 bayes_seen
-rw-rw-rw- 1 spamd spamd 4739072 2016-02-09 08:43 bayes_toks
When I try to learn a new message on the receiving server (where I moved the
bayes
As per advice from this list, I have been re-using my bayes databases on
several different servers running SA. On one of the servers though, the
database is not accepted. I re-transferred them several times over ssh,
to make sure they were not corrupted. The database files are in the
correct
On 2016-01-20 22:21, Marc Perkel wrote:
Here is a list of 3494938 words and phrases used in the subject line
of SPAM and never seen in the subject line of HAM
http://www.junkemailfilter.com/data/subject-spam.txt
I thought I'd take you up on this using a combination of my corpus, and
the othe
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016, RW wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:53:10 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:
There was an improvement in FP and FN from two tokens. The marginal
improvement from three doesn't seem worth it.
The improvement from 2 to 3 is more substantial than from 1 to 2
287/160 = 1.79
160/6
is-training when previously as BAYES_999 or BAYES_00
classified samples change their result
that's done with a dedicated SA-instance doing only bayes test and
nothing else feeded by "spamc" and parsing the outputs, takes around 1
hour on the current hardware
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:53:10 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:
> There was an improvement in FP and FN from two tokens. The marginal
> improvement from three doesn't seem worth it.
The improvement from 2 to 3 is more substantial than from 1 to 2
287/160 = 1.79
160/69 = 2.3
Whether any of thi
corpus the database size is dominated by ephemeral tokens which makes
the situation look worse than it is.
It depends what you want. I don't care about an extra 100 MB
of disk space and a few milliseconds if it gives any measurable
improvement.
Personally I wouldn't like to see Bayes g
ephemeral tokens which makes
the situation look worse than it is.
It depends what you want. I don't care about an extra 100 MB
of disk space and a few milliseconds if it gives any measurable
improvement.
Personally I wouldn't like to see Bayes go multi-word because it would
likely end-up
rom
corpus the database size is dominated by ephemeral tokens which makes
the situation look worse than it is.
It depends what you want. I don't care about an extra 100 MB
of disk space and a few milliseconds if it gives any measurable
improvement.
Personally I wouldn't like to see
Am 21.01.2016 um 14:17 schrieb RW:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:45:08 +0100
Christian Laußat wrote:
Am 21.01.2016 13:19, schrieb Reindl Harald:
no entirely when "urrently, SA's bayes tokens are single words" from
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-dev/201211.mbox
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:45:08 +0100
Christian Laußat wrote:
> Am 21.01.2016 13:19, schrieb Reindl Harald:
> > no entirely when "urrently, SA's bayes tokens are single words" from
> > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-dev/201211.mbox/%3c509d55a8.3
pams, but also in 22
spams. While 1400/1422 still makes the token useful for Bayes, his algorithm
would discount it altogether because it's not "pure" ham.
Regards,
Dianne.
ject line of HAM
[snip]
And what, exactly, is your point? Bayes would handle that just fine.
Tokens in your first list would score 0.00 for spam probability and
tokens in your second list would score 1.00 and Bayes would be great.
Regards,
Dianne.
Am 21.01.2016 13:19, schrieb Reindl Harald:
no entirely when "urrently, SA's bayes tokens are single words" from
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-dev/201211.mbox/%3c509d55a8.30...@gmail.com%3E
is still true
please review that response below and consider
;
> >
> >"ambulatory care" -> only in ham
> >"aall cards" -> only in spam
> >
> > and
> >
> > "ambulatory care" occurs 16 times in ham and 0 times in spam
> > "aall cards" occurs
tween
"ambulatory care" -> only in ham
"aall cards" -> only in spam
and
"ambulatory care" occurs 16 times in ham and 0 times in spam
"aall cards" occurs 0 times in ham and 3 times in spam
is that you have discarded the count informat
uot;ambulatory care" occurs 16 times in ham and 0 times in spam
>
>"aall cards" occurs 0 times in ham and 3 times in spam
>
> is that you have discarded the count information.
Plus, the "never in ham" and "never in spam" lists omit any me
On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 22:21:49 -0800
Marc Perkel wrote:
> OK - Just to show you this isn't Bayesian - see if you can do this.
>
> Here is a list of 5505874 words and phrases used in the subject line
> of HAM and never seen in the subject line of SPAM
>
> http://www.junkemailfilter.com/data/subject
;" and
when you don't stop advertising that aggressive you are classified as
spammer too
177 MB only subjects?
well, not really impressive given that i easly get the same results with
a 81 MB bayes-db containing the *complete* junk of 1.5 years while only
selected ham (reported w
El día Wednesday, January 20, 2016 a las 10:21:49PM -0800, Marc Perkel escribió:
> OK - Just to show you this isn't Bayesian - see if you can do this.
>
> Here is a list of 5505874 words and phrases used in the subject line of
> HAM and never seen in the subject line of SPAM
>
> http://www.junk
OK - Just to show you this isn't Bayesian - see if you can do this.
Here is a list of 5505874 words and phrases used in the subject line of
HAM and never seen in the subject line of SPAM
http://www.junkemailfilter.com/data/subject-ham.txt
Here is a list of 3494938 words and phrases used in th
On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:01:59 -0800
Marc Perkel wrote:
> Bayes compares the test message to what's in the Ham corpus and
> what's in the Spam corpus and comes up with a number indicating it's
> more like one or the other.
As I mentioned earlier, your filter is
Bayes compares the test message to what's in the Ham corpus and what's
in the Spam corpus and comes up with a number indicating it's more like
one or the other.
Evolution matched the Ham corpus and not matches the spam corpus to get
a ham score. Then it matches the spam corpus
On 30 Dec 2015, at 8:37, RW wrote:
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 20:41:31 -0500
Bill Cole wrote:
On 29 Dec 2015, at 20:02, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
esired result.
Clearly you can do the su magic if needed.
Um, no.
Neither su nor sudo magically changes the permissions or ownership of
files.
No, but
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 20:41:31 -0500
Bill Cole wrote:
> On 29 Dec 2015, at 20:02, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
>
esired result.
> >
> > Clearly you can do the su magic if needed.
>
> Um, no.
>
> Neither su nor sudo magically changes the permissions or ownership of
> files.
No, but sudo allows sa-
Am 30.12.2015 um 03:11 schrieb Ian Zimmerman:
On 2015-12-29 20:41 -0500, Bill Cole wrote:
Neither su nor sudo magically changes the permissions or ownership of
files. If you pass filenames as arguments they must be readable by the
user actually running sa-learn, which is the *unprivileged* us
On 2015-12-29 20:41 -0500, Bill Cole wrote:
> Neither su nor sudo magically changes the permissions or ownership of
> files. If you pass filenames as arguments they must be readable by the
> user actually running sa-learn, which is the *unprivileged* user
> handling the system-wide BayesDB ("amavi
On 29 Dec 2015, at 20:02, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
On 2015-12-29 19:44 -0500, Bill Cole wrote:
On 29 Dec 2015, at 18:54, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
In fact sa-learn accepts multiple named arguments on the command
line,
so the alternative I use is to go through the spambox N files at a
time
in a shel
On 2015-12-29 19:44 -0500, Bill Cole wrote:
> On 29 Dec 2015, at 18:54, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
>
> >In fact sa-learn accepts multiple named arguments on the command line,
> >so the alternative I use is to go through the spambox N files at a time
> >in a shell loop. (I have N=100 but obviously this
On 29 Dec 2015, at 18:54, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
In fact sa-learn accepts multiple named arguments on the command line,
so the alternative I use is to go through the spambox N files at a
time
in a shell loop. (I have N=100 but obviously this depends.)
Which successfully ignores the original i
On 2015-12-29 17:50 -0500, Bill Cole wrote:
> Yes, with the advantage of using Mail::SpamAssassin::Util::secure_tmpfile()
> rather
> than whatever I happen to roll up in a bit of Q&D shell that I never get
> around to
> reviewing for edge cases...
>
> The main reason to do something like that i
lso possible to train via
spamc.
Yes. IF you run spamd and it's how your system-wide SA filtering is
done already, that's arguably the best way to do ad hoc (re)training
since you can be sure it's hitting the right DB and you can feed it in
parallel.
Personally I'd avoid
On 29 Dec 2015, at 8:28, Jude DaShiell wrote:
With spamassassin, is it possible to have the filter show counts of
number of messages sent to spam, number of messages sent to ham, and
total number of messages processed that a user can check?
Since SpamAssassin is a suite of Perl modules and an
ust a directory of files. If you need to train
an arbitrary selection of files, you could symlink them into a
temporary directory. If you run spamd it's also possible to train via
spamc.
Personally I'd avoid the unforced use of mbox around Bayes without
being sure that "From-escaping&q
ze=0 --progress --ham /sample-folder/ham/
while both folders contain single eml-files which don't need to have a
leading 'From' sa-learn is able to display progress including estimated
time to finish
_
yours:
for SAMPLE_FILE in "$SA_MILTER_HOME&q
er of
> messages processed that a user can check?On Mon, 28 Dec 2015, Bill Cole wrote:
>
>> Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 23:42:03
>> From: Bill Cole
>> Reply-To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Is BAYES filtering working?
: users@spamassassin.apache.org
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Is BAYES filtering working? Having doubts.
On 28 Dec 2015, at 17:54, Peter L. Berghold wrote:
The script that I use to pull the messages out of a
spam bucket invoking sa-learn runs as root which has permissions to read
On 28 Dec 2015, at 17:54, Peter L. Berghold wrote:
The script that I use to pull the messages out of a
spam bucket invoking sa-learn runs as root which has permissions to
read
from anywhere. The complication is the amavis does not have
permissions
to read the Maildir files for trivial users
at said, I have some thoughts as how to solve that
well, you should never run such commands as root
https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/SiteWideBayesSetup
in the best case you configure both (training user and amavis) to use
the same bayes database or you find a way to read the samples a
I think you might be on to something here. When I run
"sa-learn --dump magic"
as root and as amavis they are definitely different. Here is the result
as "root" again:
# sa-learn --dump magic
0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db vers
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015, Peter L. Berghold wrote:
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:38:17AM -0800, John Hardin wrote:
* you haven't also been training ham. Bayes needs sufficient examples of
both to be able to make a judgement.
Oh yes, been training ham too.
Good.
* you're somehow m
them to sa-learn and yet they still keep popping up every other
fetch from my server.
How do I figure out where the issue is or if the learning is even working?
* what does oyur maillog say when your grep for BAYES
* what do your headers say
* did you train at least 100 spam *and* ham samples
*
them to sa-learn
and yet they still keep popping up every other fetch from my server.
How do I figure out where the issue is or if the learning is even working?
This is a FAQ. Have you searched the mailing list archives?
Common problems:
* you're not training the Bayes database that SA/Amav
On Monday 28 December 2015 at 20:27:32, Peter L. Berghold wrote:
> I've been noticing a lot of SPAM emails coming to my account
> How do I figure out where the issue is or if the learning is even
> working?
Show us the headers of the delivered email/s?
Antony.
--
"Once you have a panic, thin
I've been noticing a lot of SPAM emails coming to my account with
subject headers "Trump's Brain Secret" and similar, along with "Amazon
Gift Card" and other something for nothing sorts of emails. I keep
feeding them to sa-learn and yet they still keep popping up every other
fetch from my serv
PAM due to BAYES_99 (99-100% SPAM), for example
this mail I'm responding now; I saved it as 'rh.mail' and run it
through:
"sa-update" adjust scores, brings rules, disables rules but has no
business in change the bayes behavior
when ham hat a BAYES_99 you misclassified mails or
SPAM), for example
> > this mail I'm responding now; I saved it as 'rh.mail' and run it
> > through:
>
> "sa-update" adjust scores, brings rules, disables rules but has no
> business in change the bayes behavior
>
> when ham hat a BAYES_99 you mi
"sa-update" adjust scores, brings rules, disables rules but has no
business in change the bayes behavior
when ham hat a BAYES_99 you misclassified mails or did not keep a
ham/spam balance in your training
$ spamassassin -tD < rh.mail > rh.out 2> rh.debug
The results are
gt; rh.debug
The results are here
http://www.unixarea.de/SA/rh.mail
http://www.unixarea.de/SA/rh.out
http://www.unixarea.de/SA/rh.debug
Can some kind soul help me please having a look what is now wrong with my
bayes ? Thanks in advance
matthias
--
Matthias Apitz, ✉ g...@unixarea.de,
On 12/15/2015 10:57 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
This Bayes Redis works GREAT. For years I've been trying to get bayes to
work and now finally IT WORKS
good news for once...
just watch memory usage... :)
This Bayes Redis works GREAT. For years I've been trying to get bayes to
work and now finally IT WORKS
--
Marc Perkel - Sales/Support
supp...@junkemailfilter.com
http://www.junkemailfilter.com
Junk Email Filter dot com
415-992-3400
On December 13, 2015 1:16:17 AM Marc Perkel
wrote:
Because I'd have to upgrade 50 servers for consistency and if I do that
I'll probably try something other than centos.
okay, it just not how i would solve +1 server farms in gentoo, here i would
emerge --buildpkgonly on master, and then eme
601 - 700 of 4925 matches
Mail list logo
