Sounds promising. Is there a James greylist implementation? Otherwise I have been a little lax on feeding ham...
-- Bud -----Original Message----- From: David Legg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 6:26 PM To: James Users List Subject: Re: specific spam Mmm... that's interesting because our Bayesian analysis filter is working wonderfully. Sure, the odd one or two messages get through every now and then but training seems to work well. Don't forget you should train it with good messages as well as bad. There *are* patterns which the filter can detect. Every spam has a payload of some sort and more often than not the url of the payload remains fairly constant no matter how they try to disguise the lure text with images etc. On the other hand my ISP has just implemented Greylisting (http://projects.puremagic.com/greylisting/whitepaper.html) and although it is probably just a short term measure (maybe lasting a year or two until the spammers catch up) it has been dramatic in cutting down spam and has the benefit of needing no constant training. > not much hope on these with Bayesian Analysis IMO. There aren't any > patterns which such a filter can detect. > Would love to hear some ideas on how to detect them reliably, too. > >> I'm running james 2.3 with the BayesianAnalysis filter. It is an >> awesome >> combination except there are two fairly specific spam messages that >> seem to >> get through no matter how many times I feed them to the engine, Regards, - David Legg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
