https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7210
Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected], | |[email protected] --- Comment #1 from Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> --- As a general rule, it's almost impossible to make a rule without false positives which is why most rules are scored well below the 5.0 threshold. What matters most is the ratio of spam to ham (we call it the S/O). The S/O is the 4th column which I've added the asterisks 0 0.0048 0.0011 *0.820* 0.51 2.00 URI_WP_HACKED_2 and 0 0.0112 0.0095 *0.540* 0.52 (n/a) __PS_TEST_LOC_WP I also know that I see a lot of compromised wp installs in spam so I have a number of rules that hit on wp-xyz. Changing to exclude one plugin is likely to do just as much bad as good. And, this is a test rule and a meta rule that only scores 2.0. Anyway, need to see the email sample to see if this merits work anyway because if it isn't being marked over 5.0, it's general "normal" operations. Additionally, based on the meta (__PS_TEST_LOC_WP && !URI_WP_HACKED) && !__TO_EQ_FROM && !__THREADED, there are potentially better fixes. John, your thoughts? Regards, KAM -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
