On 5 Dec 2015, at 14:46, Torsten Bronger wrote:
Hallöchen!
Bill Cole writes:
On 5 Dec 2015, at 4:42, Torsten Bronger wrote:
In http://wilson.bronger.org/37196
Nope:
Sorry, works now.
This:
-5.3 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
3.0 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/)
3.0 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50%
[cf: 100]
6.0 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level
above 50%
[cf: 100]
Indicates that someone has sabotaged your SA scores. Those are entirely
insane scores for those tests. If the default values were used, that
message would not have been misclassified.
Note that while the Razor client package has not been updated recently,
it is not something that needs substantial ongoing development: the
critical component of Razor is in the fingerprint data on Cloudmark's
servers. What this particular false positive probably means is that
someone reported a message with an URL similar to one in that message as
spam. Razor (like Cloudmark Authority, its commercial cousin) does
poorly with low-occurrence URLs. That's why razor-whitelist exists. Use
it. And don't trust whoever set your BAYES and RAZOR scores to have
anything to do with your spam control.
