>-----Original Message----- >From: Jake Colman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 2:54 PM >To: users@spamassassin.apache.org >Subject: Re: Is Bayes Really Necessary? > > >>>>>> "CS" == Chris Santerre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Jake Colman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 10:09 AM > >> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org > >> Subject: Is Bayes Really Necessary? > >> > >> > >> > >> Given the rather complete set of rules that ship with SA >and which can > >> expanded with SARE, does bayes learning really help? Won't > >> the rules catch > >> pretty much everything anyway? > > CS> Oh my favorite subject!!! :) > > CS> NO! Bayes is not necessary. IMHO, for personal use, it >is incredible. But I > CS> feel the care of it is more difficult then your average >user would care to > CS> keep up. > > CS> For site wide, I'm pretty much against it. I know >people will argue that > CS> point. I'm obviously biased towards SARE rules updated >with RDJ. And the use > CS> of URIBL.com lists. But these allow a general users, or >a sitewide install > CS> to "set and forget". Which is what we strive for, so SA >can be more widley > CS> excepted. > > CS> I have a 99% filter rate without bayes. And I'm proud of that. > > CS> Chris Santerre > CS> System Admin and SARE/URIBL Ninja > CS> http://www.rulesemporium.com > CS> http://www.uribl.com > >I already use RDJ and the automatic updater. How do I use >URIBL? I looked >at the usage page and I undersyand that I need to create a .cf >file but how >does it access the lists?
If you are using SA 3.x, support is already included. You simply have to create the config file, restart spamd, and *poof* way less spam. Net::Dns is required. I forget which version. I forget a lot of stuff. What was the question? --Chris
