Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 10:05 -0500, Chris Barnes wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
The AWL score for this message is minimal (one can tell by
calculating
the stock rules' scores without it). Your problem here is
BAYES_00 and
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED.
BAYES_00
Ricardo Kleemann wrote on Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:31:33 -0700:
A question about AWL... addresses that get into AWL for score averaging, if
we run sa-learn on messages, will the senders of those messages be then
removed from AWL consideration?
No, there is no connection.
I also get confused
Thank you.
- Original Message -
From: Kai Schaetzl mailli...@conactive.com
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:10 AM
Subject: Re: Spam with AWL and Bayes00
Ricardo Kleemann wrote on Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:31:33 -0700:
A question about AWL... addresses
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 09:15:08 -0700
Ricardo Kleemann rica...@americasnet.com wrote:
Ok. ;-) so how exactly does AWL work and how is its score determined?
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=awl+spamassassinl=1
Ricardo Kleemann wrote on Tue, 10 Mar 2009 09:15:08 -0700:
so how exactly does AWL work and how is its score determined?
why not consult the wiki first?
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AutoWhitelist
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services:
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Chris Barnes wrote on Mon, 09 Mar 2009 12:06:10 -0500:
I have purged my bayes db and issued sa-learn to rebuild it.
How?
sa-learn --clear
But the
Bayes_00 score persists.
Are you learning those very messages as spam? I find that just learning a
message as spam
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
The AWL score for this message is minimal (one can tell by calculating
the stock rules' scores without it). Your problem here is BAYES_00 and
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED.
BAYES_00 means your Bayes DB is pretty skewed. You should train sa-learn
on these messages.
I do. Daily.
On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 10:05 -0500, Chris Barnes wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
The AWL score for this message is minimal (one can tell by calculating
the stock rules' scores without it). Your problem here is BAYES_00 and
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED.
BAYES_00 means your Bayes DB is pretty
I read through a BUNCH of the previous posts that seemed similar, but
never really saw how to go about fixing this sort of problem.
I am getting a BUNCH of spam messages which are coming in with header
information similar to this:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,
Chris Barnes wrote on Mon, 09 Mar 2009 12:06:10 -0500:
I have purged my bayes db and issued sa-learn to rebuild it.
How?
But the
Bayes_00 score persists.
Are you learning those very messages as spam? I find that just learning a
message as spam *once* gives it a BAYES_99 on the next scan.
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Chris Barnes wrote on Mon, 09 Mar 2009 12:06:10 -0500:
Q1: how did these addresses (which are all pretty obviously spam and
none of which are in our own domain) get into the AWL to begin with?
They came in and were delivered. You don't know what AWL
On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 12:06 -0500, Chris Barnes wrote:
I read through a BUNCH of the previous posts that seemed similar, but
never really saw how to go about fixing this sort of problem.
I am getting a BUNCH of spam messages which are coming in with header
information similar to this:
Hello John,
Q1: how did these addresses (which are all pretty obviously spam and
none of which are in our own domain) get into the AWL to begin with?
They came in and were delivered. You don't know what AWL thinks about
them. Why do you think it should only take mail from your domain?
Chris
13 matches
Mail list logo
