Am 26.08.2014 um 00:02 schrieb Ian Zimmerman: > On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 19:50:20 +0000, > David Jones <djo...@ena.com> wrote: > > Ian> I definitely have FNs today (about 10 by now today, normally 0). > > Ian> Looks like some/all RBLs tests are not working. I have not changed > Ian> my configuration at all. > > Ian> Sample here: > > Ian> http://pastebin.com/dsqaVA9Z > > David> This hit DCC_CHECK, BAYES_50, CRM114, BOGOFILTER and KAM_EU rules > David> and would have been blocked on my SA 3.4.0 servers. > > Isn't it a bit odd that SA has rules for all these other Bayes powered > backends? Why not give a bit more weight to its own Bayes instead, > rather than make users forage for other tools that do essentially the > same thing?
+1 the "bayes=1.000000" below makes me wonder because around 1000 careful selected ham/spam messages for training - IMHO that should be more in such clear cases however, i admit that i am a beginner with SA! Aug 26 00:01:32 mail-gw spamd[6836]: spamd: result: Y 5 - ADVANCE_FEE_4_NEW,ADVANCE_FEE_4_NEW_MONEY,ADVANCE_FEE_5_NEW,ADVANCE_FEE_5_NEW_MONEY,ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_99,BAYES_999,DEAR_SOMETHING,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FREEMAIL_FROM,LOTS_OF_MONEY,T_MONEY_PERCENT,URG_BIZ scantime=0.3,size=4760,user=sa-milt,uid=189,required_score=1.0,rhost=localhost,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=29317,mid=<*********>,bayes=1.000000,autolearn=disabled
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
