On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Marc Perkel wrote: > Maybe I'm doing something wrong but with the various methods of > bayes poisoning going on I've found that bayes is just lowering > the score of spam and causing more spam to get through. Where > bayes used to be the centerpiece of spam filtering now I have > turned it off to increase accuracy.
I've never trusted automatic learning. Why let your Bayes database be (even partially) under the control of a third party, particularly when that third party is the attacker? If a spam technique that scores low is found or that does not place the commercial message in the textual parts of the message, and you have automatic learning turned on, then the bad guys have the ability to affect to a degree your token balance. Hand-trained bayes can't be affected by poisoning. -- John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a [EMAIL PROTECTED] key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- USMC Rules of Gunfighting #7: In ten years nobody will remember the details of caliber, stance, or tactics. They will only remember who lived. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 593 days until the Presidential Election
