On 12/13/2017 5:18 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
my statements are based on a decade expierinece with a lot of users
from all over the world, on you personal server you can even reject
anything not whitelisted, from the moment on when other peoples
mailflow is affected it's no longer that easy
It's true. At first I noticed a pattern and decided to look-into how I
could write a rule, probably starting with a low score, to test its
effectiveness.
However, I ran your test to determine how many emails it would actually
affect. In a folder of just over 5100 emails, there would be < 2%
false-positives. That's actually better than I expected! If you
offered me a rule that only anticipated 2% false positives to try, I
would say it was worth it for sure!
this would be a rule with a majority of false positives
you really should also look at your HAM
I didn't see the basis for your "majority" of false positives. Did you
run your test against a spam folder as well? What were the results there?
cat *.eml | grep UTF-8 | grep -i subject | wc -l
2150
that tells me that rougly 10% of all ham mails would hit
There seems to be a large disparity between your (10%) result and my
(2%) result. Can you explain how that could be?
Thank you again!
