On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 15:19 +0100, Marcin Krol wrote:
> Ned Slider wrote:
>
> > Yes, additional DNSBLs such as psbl and uceprotect can be integrated
> > into SA
>
> Well, isn't it better to use them before SA, provided your MTA does have
> this feature (I recommend Exim to everyone)?
No -- unless you ultimately trust the RBL to produce a *negligible*
amount of FPs. Every single RBL does have FPs to a highly variable
degree. Instead ob outright blocking on a hit, it is a good idea to
assign a score for the hit only, and see what the result is after all
tests have been performed...
Exactly the SA approach. A single (or even a few) rules and RBLs can
misfire, without affecting the overall deliverability of a particular
mail.
> > Also look at setting up Bayes and train it well. A well trained Bayes
> > setup can hit 99% plus spam (for me) and can be highly effective.
>
> Except I found that while it often gets positive identification right,
> it sometimes produces false negatives (BAYES_00 negative scoring gets
> fired on what it should classify as spam -- I reduced BAYES_00 scoring
> for that reason).
As mentioned a few times already -- do train Bayes instead. That's a
mis-fire of Bayes, and needs to be corrected.
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
