On 03/09/2017 06:14 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 3/9/2017 12:04 PM, Cedric Knight wrote:
Well, not based on mass checks or any advanced analysis or anything, it
just stops obvious Facebook etc ham being marked as spam, so working
much better than the previous score of 3.253.
Compared to RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, which I think Axb manually adjusted down
to 0.5 back in September, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB hits about a tenth as much,
but with a hit similarly being about a 25% risk of being a FP. I could
write some local rules to try separating out the lastexternal hits and
see if it eliminates some FPs, but I doubt it will. There was some
other experience upthread of RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB (eg from Steve Zinski)
being a problem.
If a related rule had to be adjusted down, it makes sense that this
might have similar troubles. Axb, do you agree we should lower/cap this
rule at 0.5 as well?
If the FP rate is as high as Cedric mentions, this might be considered
for removal but we can address that after a rule score adjustment.
Regards,
KAM
atm there's a ton of hacked web servers spewing spam so I'm ok with
lowering the score but sugggest we try going with 1.5 and see how it goes.
Comments?
