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
