BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
Hello TBBETA Members! Yesterday I installed Achim's bug-fixed BF 2.0.1. Before that I very, very rarely had a false positive (by 2.0 and predecessors), all in all I can only remember four instances and they were easily explainable. This morning I polled my mail and four out of six messages from this list were suddenly deemed Junk. I didn't change any of my settings. Anybody seen something similar? -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request The most powerful strategy in life is tit-for-tat. None other is as successful. (Derek Leveret) Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Antispam Bayes Filter Plugin 2.0.1 (Open Source)
Hello Francis FG a) The version number still reads 2.0.0? On mine, the version number is 2.0.1 after automatuc update (The Bat! must be closed) I can't use the automatic update function as I'm behind a firewall, and the plugin upgrade program cannot handle that. I re-downloaded and re-installed this am (after all these successful reports) and it is now fine. The reported signature macro problem was entirely due to my inability to spell SPAMFILTERVERSION sigh -- regards, Graham Using The Bat! 3.0.2.10 assisted by Bayes Filter Plugin v2.0.1 under Windows XP 5.1 (Build 2600, Service Pack 1) -- Notice: This e-mail message, together with any attachments, contains information of Merck Co., Inc. (One Merck Drive, Whitehouse Station, New Jersey, USA 08889), and/or its affiliates (which may be known outside the United States as Merck Frosst, Merck Sharp Dohme or MSD and in Japan, as Banyu) that may be confidential, proprietary copyrighted and/or legally privileged. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named on this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete it from your system. -- Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
Hello Dierk, Thursday, January 6, 2005, 3:17:45 AM, you wrote: Yesterday I installed Achim's bug-fixed BF 2.0.1. Before that I very, very rarely had a false positive (by 2.0 and predecessors), all in all I can only remember four instances and they were easily explainable. This morning I polled my mail and four out of six messages from this list were suddenly deemed Junk. I didn't change any of my settings. Anybody seen something similar? Same here! -- Best regards, Timmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
Dierk, On 06-01-2005 09:17, you [DH] wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: DH Yesterday I installed Achim's bug-fixed BF 2.0.1. Before that I DH very, very rarely had a false positive (by 2.0 and predecessors), DH all in all I can only remember four instances and they were easily DH explainable. DH This morning I polled my mail and four out of six messages from this DH list were suddenly deemed Junk. I didn't change any of my settings. Before it did not seem to work well here. Hopefully now that the public blacklists are to be working again, that may be the course of the increased aggression? -- greeting Best regards /greeting author Peter Fjelsten /author thebat version 3.0.1.33 Pro /thebat version env. ~18 POP3, 1 IMAP (MailMax 5.5) 1 IMAP (Exchange 6.5), 150K msgs. /env. os Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 /os Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
Dierk Haasis wrotes on 06/01/2005 at 19:17:45 +1100 subject BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive? : This morning I polled my mail and four out of six messages from this list were suddenly deemed Junk. I didn't change any of my settings. Anybody seen something similar? no false positives here. Please look in the Bayesfilter-logfile if it was the Bayesian or the Regex method that caused your false positives! -- Sincerely Hendrik Oesterlin - email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber-IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ 215599852 - MSN [EMAIL PROTECTED] - YIM moimeme666fr - AIM moimeme666fr TheBat! 3.0.1.33 and Bayes Filter Plugin v2.0.1 on Windows 2000 Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
Hello Hendrik! On Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:59:10 PM you wrote: no false positives here. Please look in the Bayesfilter-logfile if it was the Bayesian or the Regex method that caused your false positives! I went through the log with a machete to extract the significant entries; here are some: Mi, Jan 05 2005, 22:56:52, auf DNS-BLACKLIST, Nachrichten-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Absender: Sean Rima [EMAIL PROTECTED], Betreff: Re[2]: Antispam Bayes Filter Plugin 2.0.1 (Open Source), Score: 100, Ursache: gespeicherte DNS-Anfrage Mi, Jan 05 2005, 23:20:34, auf DNS-BLACKLIST, Nachrichten-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Absender: Dierk Haasis [EMAIL PROTECTED], Betreff: Re: Antispam Bayes Filter Plugin 2.0.1 (Open Source), Score: 100, Ursache: dnsbl.sorbs.net list.dsbl.org Do, Jan 06 2005, 09:03:40, auf DNS-BLACKLIST, Nachrichten-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Absender: George Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED], Betreff: Re: Common vs account filters, Score: 100, Ursache: gespeicherte DNS-Anfrage I didn't find the original entries leading to George's and Sean's Score. Curiously my own message was scored high due to a blacklist server (not that I am aware of being BL'ed, or why I should be). -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request He who hesitates is probably right. Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
Dierk, On 06-01-2005 14:26, you [DH] wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ursache: gespeicherte DNS-Anfrage DNSBL. Ursache: dnsbl.sorbs.net list.dsbl.org And again. Ursache: gespeicherte DNS-Anfrage And again. So it is due to the fact that DNSBL finally works. DH Curiously my own message was scored high due to a blacklist server DH (not that I am aware of being BL'ed, or why I should be). You can see your result here http://moensted.dk/spam/?addr=write4u.deSubmit=Submit and make a query yourself here http://openrbl.org/ as well (fewer results). I does not look like you are on lists (to any greater extent). -- greeting Best regards /greeting author Peter Fjelsten /author thebat version 3.0.1.33 Pro /thebat version env. ~18 POP3, 1 IMAP (MailMax 5.5) 1 IMAP (Exchange 6.5), 150K msgs. /env. os Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 /os Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
Hello Peter! On Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 2:36:58 PM you wrote: I does not look like you are on lists (to any greater extent). Hm, as far as I can interpret the results, I'd say it was pure coincidence that my own message got filtered/blacklisted. Shouldn't be; I just notched up the number of BLS results (it was set to 2, the default I guess) being considered. Lets see what happens with further TBBETA messages and other legitimate mail I get. -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request I think for my part one half of manhood is mad - and the other not very sound. (Derek Leveret/Benjamin Smollett) Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Common vs account filters
Hello George, On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 19:23:03 -0800 GMT (06/01/2005, 10:23 +0700 GMT), George Mitchell wrote: GM As I understand the problem, you have a lot of complicated common GM filters. Since the common filters are evaluated before account GM filters, you have to specify continue processing other filters for GM each common filter in order to get to the account filters. So, every GM message gets evaluated by every common filter, and this overwhelms GM TB!. Correct? Correct. GM If so, you could prevent this by having a single common filter with GM the special matching condition Any message. It would have continue GM processing other filters checked. All of your current existing GM common filters would become sub-filters of this one, and each GM sub-filter would have continue processing other filters unchecked. I follow. GM By definition each incoming message would match the common filter, so GM TB! would begin evaluating the sub-filters. This would continue until GM one was matched. At this point evaluation of all remaining GM sub-filters would abort, and since the parent filter allowed GM subsequent filters, the account filters would be evaluated. Now I get it! Thanks for your patient explanation. GM If only common sub-filters worked. Now that is a bummer, then. I have come up with another idea: I can ask the sysad to add an X-Received-By header to incoming mails, shwoing which mailbox each mail actually comes in on. Then I can create common filters in TB that set the colour code according to that header and continue processing. There would only be 8 of those filters with one condition each, so I don't think that would make TB choke. We are using a Merak mail server in the office. Is Merak able to add such a header? TF This describes that subfilters in common filters should work. I don't TF think this is related to my problem. GM This is a bug I think Ritlabs really needs to fix. Filtering is a GM pretty key feature, and a part of it simply doesn't work. It's not GM like this is an elusive bug. ACK. -- Cheers, Thomas. Nennen Sie eine Touristen-Attraktion in Rom: Der schiefe Turm von Pisa Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Common vs account filters
Hello Thomas, M No, please. The problem is that Common filters are still buggy. Otherwise M you could easily do what you wish. How can I do what I want to do with subfilters in common filters? George Mitchel has explained it perfectly and, as I can see, you have seen our point. -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain) Using The Bat! v3.0.2.6 on Windows 2000 5.0 Service Pack 4 Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
hello, please check the logfile which filter catched the false sorted mails. if it was the dns blacklist filter, try to increase the default value for dns filtering. if it was the regular expression filter try to increase the threshold value. alternative you can disable one of them or both!!! achim Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
Hello Achim! On Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 8:02:33 PM you wrote: please check the logfile which filter catched the false sorted mails. if it was the dns blacklist filter, try to increase the default value for dns filtering. At least the messages I found the lines in the log for showed DNS BL, so I increased the value (which, BTW, was down again, when I looked into it a few hours later). if it was the regular expression filter try to increase the threshold value. I will follow it the next few days and see what happens. If I get more false positives (something I haven't had before, significantly) I will change more settings. -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request Arbeit um der Arbeit willen ist gegen die Natur. (John Locke) Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
Hello Dierk, Thursday, January 6, 2005, 8:17:45 AM, you wrote: Hello TBBETA Members! Yesterday I installed Achim's bug-fixed BF 2.0.1. Before that I very, very rarely had a false positive (by 2.0 and predecessors), all in all I can only remember four instances and they were easily explainable. This morning I polled my mail and four out of six messages from this list were suddenly deemed Junk. I didn't change any of my settings. Anybody seen something similar? Nope, not here, no false positives here since installing it. Sean -- ICQ: 679813 YAHOO: thecivvie Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: tcobone Vodafone +353879120530 :irl-flag: HamMails: 7467 SpamMails: 254 detected Ham: 6911 (99.45%) detected Spam: 187 (54.01%) FALSE Ham detected: 86 FALSE Spam detected: 38 HamMails: 7467 SpamMails: 254 detected Ham: 6911 (99.45%) detected Spam: 187 (54.01%) FALSE Ham detected: 86 FALSE Spam detected: 38 HamMails: 7467 SpamMails: 254 detected Ham: 6911 (99.45%) detected Spam: 187 (54.01%) FALSE Ham detected: 86 FALSE Spam detected: 38 HamMails: 7467 SpamMails: 254 detected Ham: 6911 (99.45%) detected Spam: 187 (54.01%) FALSE Ham detected: 86 FALSE Spam detected: 38 knock knock.. who's there.. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: Antispam Bayes Filter Plugin 2.0.1 (Open Source)
Hello Dierk, Wednesday, January 5, 2005, 9:59:27 PM, you wrote: Hello Sean! On Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:45:08 PM you wrote: I dunno if you noticed but I cannot seem to get the macros to work :( Do you mean the Update program? I couldn't make it work correctly at first - until I remembered to shut down TB before using it. Since it exchanges files used by TB it cannot work while TB runs ... No the macros that deal with the version and spams, but I found there is a problem with my wiamp/cookie macro -- ICQ: 679813 YAHOO: thecivvie Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: tcobone Vodafone +353879120530 :irl-flag: HamMails: 7467 SpamMails: 254 detected Ham: 6911 (99.45%) detected Spam: 187 (54.01%) FALSE Ham detected: 86 FALSE Spam detected: 38 HamMails: 7467 SpamMails: 254 detected Ham: 6911 (99.45%) detected Spam: 187 (54.01%) FALSE Ham detected: 86 FALSE Spam detected: 38 A drunk mans' words are a sober mans' thoughts. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?
2005-01-06|09:17 you wrote: This morning I polled my mail and four out of six messages from this list were suddenly deemed Junk. I didn't change any of my settings. Anybody seen something similar? Not here - on contrary: my plug-in seems to be overtained: ver 2.0 and 2.0.1 seems to be more and more 'liberal' - there is no FP, but number of not recognized spams flows into my inbox :( -- GH/P/SS d- s:+ a38 C++ L+ W+++ N++ K- w O-- M-- PS--- PE+ Y+ PGP++ t--- 5-- X R- b++ DI- D-- G e+++ h r+++ z+++ The Bat! Polish Support http://thebat.pl The Bat! 3.0.2.10, W systemie Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Dodatek Service Pack 2 np.: silence Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
