If I use spamassassin -D --lint then it reveals that I'm at 3.0.2 I have posted the x-spam-status from 15 messages at http://www.meehanontheweb.com/xspamstatus.txt (the "software_spam_rule", which looks for 'software' in the subject, is one I wrote in local.cf)
Autolearn sometimes says "failed" but most often says "no". Sans rules, here is what I have in local.cf: rewrite_header Subject ***SPAM(_SCORE_)*** dns_available yes required_score 4.0 bayes_path /etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes use_bayes 1 bayes_auto_learn 1 bayes_file_mode 0777 report_safe 0 bayes_ignore_header X-purgate bayes_ignore_header X-purgate-ID bayes_ignore_header X-purgate-Ad bayes_ignore_header X-GMX-Antispam bayes_ignore_header X-Antispam bayes_ignore_header X-Spamcount bayes_ignore_header X-Spamsensitivity On Sat, February 4, 2006 23:50, Matt Kettler wrote: > Brian S. Meehan wrote: >> My question is, why is it only catching 49% of spam >> messages? I have the required # set to 4.0 > > That's pretty low.. Some questions: > > 1) What version of SA are you using? > > 2) can you post an X-Spam-Status header from one of your spams that > didn't get caught? > >> Are there things I can put in place, other rules that are preformed or >> something to catch more spam? > Yes, but a hit rate that poor suggests there are other problems to look > for. In particular, check for spam that matches ALL_TRUSTED. > > If you ever get any spam (or any external email) matching ALL_TRUSTED, > please read this for a fix: > > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/TrustPath > >> Autolearn always seems to be off when I look >> at the headers of spam messages, caught and uncaught. > Off? what exactly do you mean by autolearning is off? Do you mean > autolearn= "no" ,"disabled" ,"unavailable", or "failed"? Each of these > has different implications as to why autolearning did not occur. > > >
