On Sun, 2004-08-15 at 22:41 -0700, Rob Blomquist wrote: > I have been running SA for about 6 months without out much trouble, having it > catch 98 or 99% of my spam (20-40 a day), but recently, I have run into some > problems with the Bayesian filters getting corrupted, and digging around for > some new rules, I adjusted my rules, and now all sorts of easy to catch spam > are not getting caught.
Is bayes still corrupted (or mis-taught)? Could try deleting your bayes DB and re-teaching a brand new one. I've seen mistrained bayes DBs cause BAYES_00 on obvious spam (giving ~a -5 score). > > I am invoking SA (spamassassin-3.0.0-0.pre4.2.3mdk) from Kmail, by passing > it > through spamc running rules_du_jour and my_rules_du_jour and using the rules: > SARE_RATWARE, SARE_BAYES_POISON_NXM, SARE_SPOOF, SARE_OEM, BOGUSVIRUS, > SARE_ADULT. Now, not only is this list getting a bit unweildly, taking about > a minute to process all uploads, but it is doing a crummy job of filtering. > > My old list (trimmed default for rules_du_jour) seemed to run better with the > basic list, but all those seem to have been depreciated for the SARE stuff. > > Does anyone have any ideas on what SARE lists are truly working for them? Or > how I could use SA for better results with Kmail? > > Rob -- Chris Thielen Easily generate SpamAssassin rules to catch obfuscated spam phrases (0BFU$C/\TED SPA/\/\ P|-|RA$ES): http://www.sandgnat.com/cmos/ Keep up to date with the latest third party SpamAssassin Rulesets: http://www.exit0.us/index.php/RulesDuJour
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
