On Sat, 28 May 2016 15:37:21 -0400
Bill Cole wrote:
> More importantly (IMHO) they aren't designed to collide with existing
> common tokens and be added back into messages that may contain those
> tokens already in order to influence Bayesian classification.
>
> There is sound statistical
On 26 May 2016, at 13:53, Andy Balholm wrote:
Spamass-milter or spamass-milt
(http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/spamass-milt/) seems to be the
de-facto standard for using SpamAssassin as a milter for Sendmail
or Postfix,
On 28.05.16 17:34, Bill Cole wrote:
I'm not sure that's really true.
Am 29.05.2016 um 02:46 schrieb Dianne Skoll:
And also, two-word phrases can be stronger indicators than the
individual words; "hot" and "sex" in isolation may not be strong spam
indicators, but "hot sex" probably is stronger.
Going from one-word tokens to one+two-word tokens will have a
On Thu, 26 May 2016, RW wrote:
I noticed that Bayes is picking-up on very strong tokens from "eval" and
"code" in headers like this:
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1013:global.php(1938) : eval()'d code
The "eval()'d code" part is in just over 2% of my spam, but it's
never occurred in a single
Am 29.05.2016 um 23:38 schrieb John Hardin:
On Thu, 26 May 2016, RW wrote:
I noticed that Bayes is picking-up on very strong tokens from "eval" and
"code" in headers like this:
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1013:global.php(1938) : eval()'d code
The "eval()'d code" part is in just over 2% of
On Sun, 29 May 2016, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 29.05.2016 um 23:38 schrieb John Hardin:
On Thu, 26 May 2016, RW wrote:
> I noticed that Bayes is picking-up on very strong tokens from "eval" and
> "code" in headers like this:
>
>X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1013:global.php(1938) : eval()'d
