Hello Frederic, Wednesday, May 11, 2005, 7:01:42 AM, you wrote:
FG> For the last weeks I have received a lot of spam concerning FG> stock alerts and different investissments. FG> Their bayes score is 99, but they don't score enough to be FG> classified as spam. ... Correction: FG> X-spam-status: No, hits=5.312 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=BAYES_99, FG> RCVD_HELO_IP_MISMATCH, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO that does score high enough to be classified as spam, but you or your administrator have raised the required score from 5.0 to 6.31. Understandable, as I used to run three domains at a required score of 9.00. However, when you on your own initiative raise the required score, you need to modify your rule scores to take that into account. Raise the scores of the rules which are most reliable and productive. FG> X-spam-status: No, hits=5.312 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=BAYES_99, FG> RCVD_HELO_IP_MISMATCH, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO FG> X-spam-status: No, hits=5.312 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=BAYES_99, FG> RCVD_HELO_IP_MISMATCH, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO FG> X-spam-status: No, hits=4.171 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=BAYES_99, FG> MIME_BASE64_TEXT, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL FG> X-spam-status: No, hits=3.873 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=BAYES_99, FG> RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL If your Bayes database is reliable and stable, bump the score for BAYES_99. Consider raising the scores for RCVD_HELO_IP_MISMATCH, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO, and RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL FG> What I wonder is what to do ? FG> Increasing the bayes_99 score ? Yes. FG> Decreasing the 6.31 spam level ? Possible. though 6.31 is reasonable if you do a little tweaking. I had great success at 9.0. FG> Try to create new rules ? Or look into adopting some of SARE's rules files, at http://www.rulesemporium.com (or other custom files available via the wiki). Bob Menschel
