On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 03:50:23PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > This isn't to say that URIBL_BLACK isn't useful, or that you guys aren't > doing a > good job. However, this is good evidence you guys are doing great, but you do > still have some areas that could use improvement. > > (Although clearly you're doing better than RAZOR2_CHECK, and > RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100, which are completely sucking in terms of accuracy on > this test)
For more information, here's the results of last week's net mass-check run
(net results should be "live"):
MSECS SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME
0 181939 52229 0.777 0.00 0.00 (all messages)
0.00000 77.6959 22.3041 0.777 0.00 0.00 (all messages as %)
22.377 28.8009 0.0000 1.000 1.00 0.00 URIBL_SC_SURBL
26.604 34.2378 0.0134 1.000 1.00 0.00 URIBL_WS_SURBL
24.854 31.9854 0.0115 1.000 1.00 0.00 URIBL_JP_SURBL
12.423 15.9889 0.0000 1.000 0.98 0.00 URIBL_AB_SURBL
23.278 29.9463 0.0479 0.998 0.96 0.00 URIBL_OB_SURBL
15.377 19.7803 0.0383 0.998 0.95 0.00 URIBL_SBL
29.707 38.1606 0.2585 0.993 0.85 0.00 URIBL_BLACK
0.236 0.3028 0.0038 0.988 0.67 0.00 URIBL_PH_SURBL
0.020 0.0264 0.0000 1.000 0.50 0.00 URIBL_RED
0.515 0.4353 0.7946 0.354 0.45 0.00 URIBL_GREY
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Maybe, just maybe, my boys can stop them from getting the book. [pause]
Yeah, and maybe I'm a chinese jet pilot." - Army of Darkness
pgpLmfC1HjN9F.pgp
Description: PGP signature
