I think that your stats of 80% is probably pretty accurate for a default
install.  I watched closely my spam and was able to see a few patterns
myself and therefore adjusted a couple of things.

I noticed that a very large portion of my spams, missed and not, were
coming from  SORBS and other blacklisted addresses.  So I raised each
one of them up to 2.5.  7-8 of them total.  With just those and a
default trained Bayes, I was consistantly hitting
about 93%.

I also installed several add on rules: weeds, chickenpox, antidrug.  I
left off backhair out of fear of FPing attachments that I get a lot of.

I've installed Razor2 and DCC.  I haven't gotten to Pyzor yet,
evaluating each one as I go.

Now with a default autolearned Bayes of about 18000 messages, which has
quite a few mis-learned emails, I'm correctly catching 99.1% of my spam
messages with only 1 FP. at a setting of 5.0 spam level.

After getting Pyzor running, I'm going to dump my Bayes database and
actively train it.

So sitting at a set and forget a rate of 80% is good.  If you babysit it
for a few thousand emails (a couple of days here), you can hit those
numbers.

Bryan Britt
Beltane Web Services


--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ICQ: 53037451
Bryan L. Britt                                        501-327-8558
Beltane Web Services, Conway, AR            http://www.beltane.com
~~~~~~~~~~Support Private Communications on the Internet~~~~~~~~~~



----------------------- Original Message -----------------------
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 13:28:06 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> I have been using SpamAssassin for a year or so, and couldnt
> get along without it.
> 
> Still, I keep seeing writeups of Spamassassin where they say
> that it is 99+% efficient at recognizing spam, at least now
> that it has the Baysian filtering in it...
> 
> Well, thats not the case here, it does recognize on the order
> of 300 messages a day (thank you, thank you), but probably 
> misses on the order of another 75-100.  
> 
> So thats more like 75-80% not 99+%. 
> 
> Now the Baysian Filtering is up (I think) and primed.
> the dcc stuff is up...
> 
> But HOW DO I TELL IF THESE THINGS ARE REALLY WORKING?
> 
> Is there any way to get any statistics out of SpamAssassin?
> 
> I do see comments about the dcc stuff in the maillog on occasion,
> mostly complaints about not being able to get to a specific site,
> 
> but it would be nice
> 
> to know if the Baysian stuff is working at all,
> or if it (SpamAssassin)
> was having long term problems getting to dcc sites.
> 
> I dont see any 'flags' for any statistics, am I missing something?
> Even a script to grep the 'tossed' messages (I save them for a few
> days) would be acceptable, but at the moment SpamAssassin is a great
> be black box,- it seems to work, but it could be having real problems
> and I wouldnt have a clue.
> 
> Well, thats longer than I wanted the message to be, but...
> 
> 
> -- 
>                                         Reg.Clemens
>                                         [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to