On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 12:45:02PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > should i read this as 76.8% of total messages received were caught by > razor?
For me anyway.
> (should i believe that only 100%-97.4% of your messages are non-spam,
> only 111 messages in the last month? maybe i don't understand what the
> *total* represents.)
This is just spam statistics. So 100% is spam, 97.4% was caught by SA,
76.8% was caught by Razor.
> (also can you explain either where the stats come from or what
> "scores", "razor not sa" and "razor cause sa" mean? "razor cause sa"
> does not hit in google, so i suspect it's your own stats script...)
>
> > Stats since 2002-12-09
> > Scores : 0.7 19 45
> > Total Messages: 4213
> > SA Caught : 4102 (97.4 %)
> > Razor Caught : 3237 (76.8 %)
> > Razor Not SA : 1 (0.0 %)
> > Razor Cause SA: 87 (2.1 %)
Sure -- it's a set of scripts I wrote that takes SA results from my spam
corpus and dumps it into a MySQL database every hour. Another script
then queries the DB for the various information and spits out the
above statement. Scores is min, avg, and max SA scores for the spam.
Razor Not SA is where messages hit RAZOR2_CHECK but SA didn't get 5
points. Razor Cause SA is where RAZOR2_CHECK was hit and that caused
SA to go over 5 points.
The goal of course is to make "Razor {Not,Cause} SA" become 0 and "SA
Caught" to become 100%.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
linux: because a PC is a terrible thing to waste
([EMAIL PROTECTED] put this on Tshirts in '93)
msg11686/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
