Thank you for the explanation. Makes sense now.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 02:55:50 PM CDT, Bill Cole
<sausers-20150...@billmail.scconsult.com> wrote:
On 2023-08-30 at 15:14:15 UTC-0400 (Wed, 30 Aug 2023 19:14:15 +0000
(UTC))
Denny Jones via users <lhweb...@aol.com>
is rumored to have said:
> Hello,
> I have looked high and low and can't find an explanation for
> multi-level scoring:
> score SCC_CANSPAM_2 3.799 0.001 3.799 0.00
> What does this mean?
> In my simplistic way of doing things I would write this as:
> score SCC_CANSPAM_2 3.799
Try running this:
perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf
That provides you with a man-like interface for the configuration of
SpamAssassin, extracted from the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf perl module.
Not very far into that document you will find:
If four valid scores are listed, then the score that is used
depends
on how SpamAssassin is being used. The first score is used when
both
Bayes and network tests are disabled (score set 0). The second
score
is used when Bayes is disabled, but network tests are enabled
(score
set 1). The third score is used when Bayes is enabled and
network
tests are disabled (score set 2). The fourth score is used when
Bayes is enabled and network tests are enabled (score set 3).
Very often, you will find the the automated rescoring system will emit
what looks like a perverse set of scores with the 2 network-enabled
scores at or near zero. That is an artifact of how rescoring is done
combined with the fact that network tests are often a distillation of
other people's recent spam detections. Essentially a very 'small'
rule is duplicative of the detection being effectively done by a network
source.
--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Not Currently Available For Hire
