> On 12 Jun 2018, at 17:11, Bill Cole <sausers-20150...@billmail.scconsult.com> > wrote: > >> On 12 Jun 2018, at 3:34, Reio Remma wrote:
>> I just noticed *autolearn=ham* for a message with a positive spam score. Is >> that normal? >> X-Spam-Flag: NO >> X-Spam-Score: 2.32 >> X-Spam-Level: ** >> X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.32 tagged_above=-3 required=3 tests=[ >> BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, >> DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, >> NO_DNS_FOR_FROM=1, TXREP=1.719] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no > > Your configuration is rather unusual (3 is a VERY low threshold) but that's > not why this got autolearned as ham. The score used for autolearn thresholds > does not use Bayes or TxRep/AWL scores. Detailscan be found with 'perldoc > Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::AutoLearnThreshold' Thanks, that’s what I was looking for and half suspected. My actual spam threshold is 6 (set in amavisd-new). Autolearn ham threshold was indeed -0.1, lowered it some more now. Thanks, Reio
