Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

I moved from Fedora to Ubuntu Gutsy and am sorting through issues. Here are both the spam message (at bottom of the web page) as well as output of SA. The message is obviously junk about the usual counterfeit mechandise tat is being peddled everywhere. http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/spam003.txt

Re: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

At 10:18 11-04-2008, Igor Chudov wrote: Here are both the spam message (at bottom of the web page) as well as output of SA. The message is obviously junk about the usual counterfeit mechandise tat is being peddled everywhere. http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/spam003.txt check: is spam? score=4

FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods) At 10:18 11-04-2008, Igor Chudov wrote: >Here are both the spam message (at bottom of the web page) as well as >output of SA. > >The message is obviously junk about the usual counterfeit mechandise >tat is being peddled everywhere. > > h

RE: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

> http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/spam003.txt Could you paste the message itself (queue file)? Would like to see what my installation has to say about this one. :-)

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

On Friday 11 April 2008 19:53:30 Josie Walls wrote: > Hello, > > Would this group agree that requiring 5 hits in order to classify an email > as spam is too conservative a number? i disagree. Rather then setting the score lower, you should set specific test higher that do match the spam specific

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

Josie Walls wrote: Hello, Would this group agree that requiring 5 hits in order to classify an email as spam is too conservative a number? I suspect ISPs have their filter settings at 3 or less. Any insight would be appreciated. I'm an ISP and we use 5 to mark and 10 to reject at smtp time

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 at 14:10 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] confabulated: Josie Walls wrote: Hello, Would this group agree that requiring 5 hits in order to classify an email as spam is too conservative a number? I suspect ISPs have their filter settings at 3 or less. Any insight would be apprecia

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

Rick Macdougall wrote: I'm an ISP and we use 5 to mark and 10 to reject at smtp time (not bounce, smtp reject 551). Same here. Dropping below 5 would cause way too many false positives. -- Kelson Vibber SpeedGate Communications

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 02:10:41PM -0400, Rick Macdougall wrote: > Josie Walls wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Would this group agree that requiring 5 hits in order to classify an email >> as spam is too conservative a number? >> >> I suspect ISPs have their filter settings at 3 or less. >> >> Any insight w

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

At 12:33 11-04-2008, Igor Chudov wrote: Hey, this is interesting. I really don't care to process anythng with score above 10. How can I block it on the sendmail level? I have sendmail. Install a milter which interacts with spamd. You can then reject spam at the SMTP level. Regards, -sm

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

Josie Walls wrote: Would this group agree that requiring 5 hits in order to classify an email as spam is too conservative a number? I wouldn't. We reject everything with a score of 18 or higher, quarantine everything with 9 or higher (I read the quarantine reports every work day), and let e

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

Jonas Eckerman wrote: We reject everything with a score of 18 or higher, quarantine everything with 9 or higher That should have been "reject *and* quarantine everything with 9 or higher" /J -- Jonas Eckerman, FSDB & Fruktträdet http://whatever.frukt.org/ http://www.fsdb.org/ http://www.fruk

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

> Jonas Eckerman wrote: > > >We reject everything with a score of 18 or higher, quarantine everything > >with 9 or higher On 14.04.08 15:09, Jonas Eckerman wrote: > That should have been > "reject *and* quarantine everything with 9 or higher" I thought you can reject *or* quarantine, the combin

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: I thought you can reject *or* quarantine, Wether that "or" is exclusive or not depends on the tools you use. With MIMEDefang (wich we use) it isn't. Since SpamAssassin has to be called after the complete message has been received, there is no technical reason

Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods)

Josie Walls wrote: Would this group agree that requiring 5 hits in order to classify an email as spam is too conservative a number? Nope. I've been running a number of systems - personal and professional - at 5 with no major runs of missed-spam or mistagged-ham (aside from the period where I

thresholds and accuracy (Re: FW: Why is this spam passing my SA (counterfeit goods))

Jonas Eckerman writes: > Josie Walls wrote: > > Would this group agree that requiring 5 hits in order to classify an email > > as spam is too conservative a number? > > I wouldn't. > > We reject everything with a score of 18 or higher, quarantine > everything with 9 or higher (I read the quaran