Oh
Oh...
Interesting...
I sure will.
So I am
imagining things... has happened before. I will try to add up the
weights and see - I will review the archives now..
so perhaps
that explains why the headers show up at the bottom of the header and not at
the top like the IP4R tests of IMail.
thanks for the
info... that sure was a case of false sense of security.
Regards,
Kami
Hmmm, how is it possible for Declude JunkMail
to track the statistical filtering header when statistical filtering
does not happen until after Declude has finished its message processing and
handed the message back to IMail for delivery?
Search the archives, there was a discussion
between Sandy Whiteman and I a few months back about this.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003
12:47 PM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail]
Experience with Statistical Filtering [IMail 8.02]
Hi;
Just
wondering if others have experimented with the Statistical Filtering of
IMail. I am simply sharing what I have seen so far since last
week.
I started
testing it last week and so far it is showing good results. Several
instances it was enough weight to block a spam that would have otherwise
gone through with our filters.
I simply
enabled Statistical Filtering and chose Insert Header
option.
then added
the following to our header filter:
HEADERS
3
CONTAINS
X-IMAIL-SPAM-STATISTICS:
0.9
HEADERS
5
CONTAINS
X-IMAIL-SPAM-STATISTICS: 1.
So far
anything with 1 has been spam and several 0.9's are seen that all have
been spam. Basically I have not seen a false positive with the
above. I may increase their weights.. but need more time to
test.
Anyone else
has any experience?
Regards,
Kami
