RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Zombie Test

[Kami Razvan]

Matt:   What I like about Scott's new feature (not his own but that of Declude :) ) - is it makes triggering the CPU intensive filters (like our URL in body, etc.) less likely to be used.   A lot of the ones that are deleted in our system hit our word filters and URL in body filters.  If this test can add enough weight so we skip those filters we will be in good shape..   Scott:  Any chance for adding a skip test if the weight is below a certain negative number.  We have negative weights and also with John's AutoWhite software our emails get weights of -200+ at times depending how many times we have emailed the person.  Naturally these emails go through all filters since they do not exceed the skipifweight setting..   Regards, Kami From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 9:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Zombie Test Kami, I turned SKIPIFWEIGHT off for this version of the test and found that it scored over 40% of my spam.  With SKIPIFWEIGHT on, it scores around 3% to of the spam (stuff that would have been held or hadn't yet reached a hold weight).  Because this hits only combinations of tests, you are much more likely to be hitting things that have already scored at least close to your hold range.  I expect that this will have only a little impact on the spam that's getting through my system, though there's not much opportunity there, but it will most definitely help to clear out about my hold file. I have another version that I may share here later on that increases the hit rate to well over 50% of spam without SKIPIFWEIGHT (5% of spam with) and targets about 10% of a hold file, and has a much better chance of finding stuff that might have scored lower than Hold.  The new test adds points to 80% of the DUL hits that land in my Hold file, and from about 2,500 DUL hits a day on my system, I'll probably only end up with about 10 that are left within 250% of my Hold weight.  The newer/unreleased version is also much more conservative with points, only adding 5 per combination, though most such E-mail ends up failing multiple combinations. I consider my system to be very tight, only holding less than 5% of spam from 10 to 24 points, so many might see an even better effect. Can you tell that I like numbers :) Matt Kami Razvan wrote: "Please return the favor and share with me any FP's that you see on this test so that I can make adjustments for the benefit of myself as well as others."  Matt: Interesting test.. I added your filters to our system and just checked the log files. I simply added the test with zero weight to watch how it performs.   In the 3 hours it has been added (with 0 weight) it has had 100% success rate with about 100 or so catches.  All emails had already exceeded the delete weight.  So it seems like so far it has not had any false positives since every single hit is already in the delete range.   As you stated I think it is a good 30%-50% delete weight test to just help the ones that are not deleted to go over the mark.   Great job..   Kami -- ===================================================== MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro. http://www.mailpure.com/software/ =====================================================