Matthias +all, 

Thank you very much.

On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 01:02:53PM +0200, Matthias Haegele wrote:
> 
> You only mentioned running sa-learn on spam you should also learn your 
> hammessages, both is important. Bayes-Performance will only be good if 
> learned on both, ham and spam.

Yes, thank you. For the sake of brevity I did not describe fully what I do, but 
I do indeed run sa-learn on the ham too (I have a nightly cron job that 
collects all the mail from a selection of folders and concatenates it into one 
mbox; I then run sa-learn --ham on that and sa-learn --spam on the spam folder).

> >...and now I'm not so sure that it's a good idea to change the rules' 
> >scores. I suppose I could reduce the threshold to 4.5; but I don't know if 
> >that's a good thing either.
> 
> I reduced the treshold too, but also watch quarantine regularly for FPs, 
> it works fine for me ...

I haven't yet done this (but am still thinking about it) see below...

> 
> >What's the best way for me to improve SA performance (bearing in mind that 
> >I'm really only an amateur spam fighter).
> >
> >Thanks in advance....
> 
> perhaps you could use:
> clamav sanesecurity
> SARE Rules
> Botnet plugin
> too ...

Well thanks for this.

I do clam checking before SA so I guess clamav sanesecurity would be 
duplicating that...

I have just now included many of the SARE rules in my sa-update. I am almost 
looking forward to getting some spam to see if they work! :)
...I presume that simply adding the rules via sa-update (as per the 
instructions on the wiki) is enough - they don't have to be "activated" in any 
way do they?

Having added all the extra SARE rules I haven't changed the overall threshold 
until I see what effect they have.

Where can I find out more about the Botnet plugin? (There doesn't seem to be a 
reference to it on the wiki).

Thanks again.

AD

Attachment: pgpwI8I3V9WAE.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to