Sorry I was out of office.
You're right there must be something wrong with the second column. Yesterday
there was a little bit of confusion as I changed different things on the
database and additionaly there was this issue with the malformed mailfrom
address. I will try to publish the correct numbers tommorrow.

Markus



> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Message Sniffer Community 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Michiel Prins
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 6. Juni 2006 12:30
> An: Message Sniffer Community
> Betreff: Re: [sniffer]AW: [sniffer]AW: [sniffer]AW: 
> [sniffer]Concerned about amount of spam going through
> 
> Are you sure? That would mean you only nees sniffer, coz none 
> of sniffer's ham is spam in the final result... 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Message Sniffer Community 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Markus Gufler
> Sent: dinsdag 6 juni 2006 12:25
> To: Message Sniffer Community
> Subject: [sniffer]AW: [sniffer]AW: [sniffer]AW: 
> [sniffer]Concerned about amount of spam going through
> 
> Sorry in the table below the column header SH and HS must be switched.
> 
> Markus
> 
>  
> 
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Message Sniffer Community
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Markus Gufler
> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 6. Juni 2006 12:17
> > An: Message Sniffer Community
> > Betreff: [sniffer]AW: [sniffer]AW: [sniffer]Concerned about 
> amount of 
> > spam going through
> > 
> > Hi
> > 
> > There mus be something wrong with your configuration of the sniffer
> > test(s)
> > 
> > Here are my numbers from yesterday based on 24462 processed messages
> > 
> > Date        Test                            SS      SH      HH      
> > HS  IMP
> > 0605        SNIFFER-TRAVEL          12      0       0       
> 23    2
> > 0605        SNIFFER-INSUR           4       0       0       
> 0     0
> > 0605        SNIFFER-AV                      0       0       0       
> > 0   0
> > 0605        SNIFFER-MEDIA           1345    0       0       
> 0     8
> > 0605        SNIFFER-SWARE           73      0       0       
> 0     0
> > 0605        SNIFFER-SNAKE           8386    0       0       
> 0     9
> > 0605        SNIFFER-SCAMS           138     0       0       
> 2     3
> > 0605        SNIFFER-PORN            908     0       0       
> 1     3
> > 0605        SNIFFER-MALWARE         12      0       0       
> 2     3
> > 0605        SNIFFER-INK                     2       0       0       
> > 0   0
> > 0605        SNIFFER-RICH            2865    0       0       
> 2     219
> > 0605        SNIFFER-CREDIT          363     0       0       
> 0     1
> > 0605        SNIFFER-CASINO          300     0       0       
> 0     0
> > 0605        SNIFFER-GENERAL         2881    0       0       
> 41    41
> > 0605        SNIFFER-EXP-A           450     0       0       
> 36    7
> > 0605        SNIFFER-OBFUSC          4       0       0       
> 5     0
> > 0605        SNIFFER-EXP-IP          28      0       0       
> 8     5
> > 
> > 
> > SS  Sniffer says spam, final result too
> > SH  Sniffer says spam, final result not
> > HH  Sniffer says ham, final result too
> > HS  Sniffer says ham, final result not
> > 
> > IMP Sniffer says spam and final result is slight above the 
> > hold weight.
> >     (This column is a part of the SS-column: 100-150% of hold)
> >     So
> >     a.) it's an important test because it's able to bring 
> the spam above
> 
> > the hold
> >         weight and without this test it wasn't hold as spam.
> >     or
> >     b.) it's a risky test because it brings legit messages above the
> hold 
> > weight
> > 
> > What result codes are you using in your test configuration? 
> > (please not publish your sniffer-id!)
> > 
> > Markus
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > Von: Message Sniffer Community
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von David Waller
> > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 6. Juni 2006 11:51
> > > An: Message Sniffer Community
> > > Betreff: Re: [sniffer]AW: [sniffer]Concerned about amount of spam 
> > > going through
> > > 
> > > Of all SPAM identified SNIFFER is finding about 30%. We see
> > an awful
> > > lot of junk email not being caught by SNIFFER, it's being
> > processed by
> > > Declude and failing some technical tests but not by SNIFFER.
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Message Sniffer Community
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Markus Gufler
> > > Sent: 06 June 2006 09:41
> > > To: Message Sniffer Community
> > > Subject: [sniffer]AW: [sniffer]Concerned about amount of 
> spam going 
> > > through
> > > 
> > > > I only see Sniffer catching about 30% of SPAM and that's
> > > the highest
> > > > it's ever been.
> > > 
> > > 30% of spam or 30% of all processed messages?
> > > Sniffer is still one of the best tests in my arsenal.
> > > 
> > > Markus
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > #############################################################
> > > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> > >   the mailing list <sniffer@sortmonster.com>.
> > > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To
> > switch to
> > > the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To switch
> > > to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send 
> > > administrative queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > #############################################################
> > > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> > >   the mailing list <sniffer@sortmonster.com>.
> > > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> To switch 
> > > to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To 
> > > switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > > Send administrative queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > #############################################################
> > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> >   the mailing list <sniffer@sortmonster.com>.
> > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To 
> switch to 
> > the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> To switch 
> > to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send 
> > administrative queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> #############################################################
> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
>   the mailing list <sniffer@sortmonster.com>.
> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To 
> switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the INDEX mode, 
> E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send administrative 
> queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #############################################################
> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
>   the mailing list <sniffer@sortmonster.com>.
> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To 
> switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the INDEX mode, 
> E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send administrative 
> queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 



#############################################################
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
  the mailing list <sniffer@sortmonster.com>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send administrative queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to