Something's fishy here.. those numbers don't add up to 5.5.

They actualy add to 3.5.

Sure there's some loss of precision due to truncation, but even adding +0.0999 for all 12 rules that hit you only get 4.6988.

Clearly something's not right here. Perhaps the true adjustment applied by the AWL isn't being reported correctly due to some bug and was actually +1.9 instead of -0.1?


At 01:07 AM 8/6/2004, lists wrote:
Content analysis details:   (5.5 points, 5.0 required)

 pts rule name              description
---- ----------------------
--------------------------------------------------
 0.2 NO_REAL_NAME           From: does not include a real name
 0.7 RCVD_BY_IP             Received by mail server with no name
 3.4 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO      Received: contains an IP address used for HELO
 0.0 HTML_80_90             BODY: Message is 80% to 90% HTML
 0.0 HTML_BADTAG_00_10      BODY: HTML message is 0% to 10% bad tags
-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
                            [score: 0.0000]
 1.2 MIME_HTML_MOSTLY       BODY: Multipart message mostly text/html MIME
 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
 0.0 HTML_NONELEMENT_00_10  BODY: 0% to 10% of HTML elements are
non-standard  2.0 MIME_MISSING_BOUNDARY  RAW: MIME section missing boundary
 0.7 MIME_BOUND_NEXTPART    Spam tool pattern in MIME boundary
 0.0 RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE   Received: by and from look like IP addresses
-0.1 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list




Reply via email to