On 26.05.2010 01:09 CE(S)T, Adam Katz wrote: > Please note that the ZMI German rules are very old, and while there > have been a few recent tweaks to the file, it doesn't look terribly > useful to any system that uses the Bayesian filter (more on this > later). I would expect these rules to fire quite rarely, even in > environments that have lots of German-language mail.
Thanks for the info. So I could drop it again as well. > spamassassin --lint -D config 2>&1 |grep zmi_german > spamassassin --lint Those told me that it should be all fine. > Next, let's see if the rules are ever triggering. This is merely a > question of filtering your logs (assuming SA is properly logged). I did that already a few days ago but there was no hit. That's why I was asking. But it seems the rules are useless to me. > Stepping away from the ZMI issue and headig towards the larger > picture, what kind of spam are you trying to nail down with this > ruleset? What goals did you hope to meet with the ZMI rules? If it's > a specific type of spam, can you pastebin an example so we can help > you more directly? I have submitted a couple of those spam messages to the ruleset maintainer, but I'm not sure if it helps. I can repost it here if you like to see it. (ZIP 48 kB) > Are you using Bayes? Are you training it? Yes. Yes. I'm only training it with spam messages though. I assume it autolearns all the rest. But the bayes filter is absolutely useless to me, it most often rates spam 0-1%, even for repeatedly learned spam messages. Maybe I should erase the bayes brain and restart from new? > Most people who want to improve their deployment's SA filters aren't > properly utilizing the various plugins. Specifically, DNSBLs, URIBLs, > and Bayes, but also things like Razor2, DCC (if legal), and Pyzor. The very most helpful plugin to me is Botnet. It detects most spam and rates 5 points which is often a big step towards rejection. Most other SA rules don't detect anything although I'm running sa-update daily and it reports an update every some weeks. Only the DNSBL rules apply every once in a while - at least to what is passing the filter. I haven't investigated what's been blocked successfully. I think I've still installed the Image Info thing plugin but I don't think it catches anything these days. Image spam seems to be over. > Upgrading to SA 3.3.1 would be a big step up if you're not there > already (if you can't, you might want to consider a back-port of the > better DNSBLs to SA 3.2.x like my khop-bl channel). I need to upgrade to SA 3.3, true. It's always been a hassle somewhere between CPAN, other disfunctional Perl junk, source code and Debian packages... It's a very complicated job. I'm also considering setting up the entire machine anew on Ubuntu basis and only use platform packages but that's not something I can do in the near future. -- Yves Goergen "LonelyPixel" <nospam.l...@unclassified.de> Visit my web laboratory at http://beta.unclassified.de
