Hrrm - are you sure it's learning properly with the emails as attachments (and with multiple attachments)?
I know that when you open the attachment you can see the properties but when it's stored won't bayes misunderstand since the spam is encapsulated within a non-spam message (or are you manually extracting the attachments for placement within imap)? Using a quick combinetic of O=original and #=attachment number and the original message is 0+1+2+3, is bayes under the learn token process going to drop 0, and learn 1, 2 and 3 separately or is it going to learn 0+1+2+3 and make additional tokens based on improper correlations between attachments 1, 2 and 3? If bayes is learning just the attachment portions and not the original message, how much of an support issue is it to ensure that these attachments are in a bayes readable format (ie: not in winmail.dat) from your clients? This seems to me to be a whole lot of effort beyond a global imap connection. Todd -----Original Message----- From: Gregory Sloop, Sloop Network & Computer Consulting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 10:27 AM To: jdow; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: selling a client on SA > > And in an environment with (we're stuck with it) Windows Outlook Express > for the mail readers and Linux for the spam filters generating the spam > and ham databases is a royal pita. (I know *I* am not about to run > Outlook. And converting to another mail tool at this point is somewhat > er "awkward" to say nothing about painful.) > I assume you mean that it's a pain to submit SPAM and HAM messages to feed bayes... It isn't as big a PITA as you might think. (I added this to the Wiki recently, so perhaps you've not seen it.) It is more work than "auto" processing - but for small sites, I much prefer to hand check submissions. We are using a shared bayes DB for say 50 or less users.) You CAN get messages from users unmodified pretty easily. You don't have to use IMAP shared folders either. First I setup two mail drop boxes - call them [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Then I simply have users do this in Outlook/Outlook Express Open a new mail message. Address new message to the correct drop box. ([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Drag messages that apply, Ham or Spam into the new message - they'll be sent as attachments. (Make sure users don't do both ham and spam together in the same message. That will make life a pain!) Then I can pick up the messages myself with IMAP and review them for real hammy/spammy-ness - and drag them into another IMAP folder for processing. Then use sa-learn to teach bayes on the IMAP folder using the --mbox option. (Plus, I can do all of this remotely. I'm a consultant, and the more I can do from off site, the better!) (I'm a newbie too, so perhaps I'm misunderstanding things - but this is a pretty decent way to do things.) Greg ----- Original Message ----- From: "jdow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 7:26 AM Subject: Re: selling a client on SA > From: "Thomas Bolioli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > I have a client who is vacillating between SA and some commercial > > products. Most of the commercial products are not as accurate as SA but > > my client has some valid points. I have limited experience setting up SA > > (always plain vanilla installs through RH and single user systems) and I > > wanted to get some feedback on what is possible/feasible from the list. > > It would be used in a multi mail server env where all external mail > > would be routed through it for checks and modified headers, subjects > > would tag spam. > > The issues are: > > 1) Does SA auto upgrade to newer versions (of the spam defs more > > importantly) or could it be set up to do so through an automated CPAN > > install? > > 2) Can individual users easily have their own training files (I know it > > is possible, looking more for feasibility) when they do not have an > > account on the system. ie; their training file could be located via the > > addressed email. If so, is there anything out there to manage that? If > > not would it be possible to write a mail handler to parse the mail > > addressed to a [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail box that users could forward spam to? > > This > > script could then use the from line to determine which user to train on. > > 3) What other issues will I run into in a multi user environment where > > the SA server is simply forwarding on mail between MTAs and not the > > final delivery agent? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > Tom > > Setup is not all that hard. It takes time to train the filters. My > experience indicates this is required. Generally each user must train > their own Baysian filter or else a generic training must be setup by > the administrator. That involves looking at spam and ham both as they > come through. *I* would not do that since it involves looking at > another person's mail. > Note that I am still using SpamAssassin in preference over other > potential tools. It works. I have personal control over it. But then, > I am a programmer by trade these days. I'd not try to install it for > my brother under these conditions, for example. (He's a rather er > unimaginative counter of Ford automobile dealership beans.) > > {^_^}
