From: "Robert Lopez" <rlopez...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, 2009/December/04 11:24
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Bowie Bailey <bowie_bai...@buc.com> wrote:
LuKreme wrote:
On 4-Dec-2009, at 01:18, jdow wrote:
With all the animosity on this issue I decided to give the HABEAS
rules a score, a negligible score to be sure, just to see what the
state of HABEAS is for me today.
In the last four days - nothing either spam or ham.
I tend to see little clusters of HABEAS scores, but they are rare. I
might see only 10-20 a month.
After following this thread for a while, I decided to take a look at my
server. So here's one more data point:
In the last month, I have seen 718 messages that hit one of the HABEAS
rules. Of those, none of them had an overall score higher than 4, and
there were only 12 that would have been scored as spam without the rule.
Since I don't have access to look at the actual messages and I don't
know what lists my customers may be signed up for, I can't say anything
for sure, but it looks like it's working fine here based on the numbers.
--
Bowie
Here is one more data point:
Since October 18th I have seen HABEAS rules listed in Spamassassin
score lines 496122 times.
One such phishing email this week was successfully delivered to 387
in-boxes.
Were it not for the HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI -4.30 other rules would have
lead to successfully stopping the message.
<< jdow: OK a 0.07% failure rate is remarkably good, In My Pathetic
Opinion. It ought to earn a fairly respectable negative score on that
basis. How far off was your -4.30 score on that spam/phish? Was that
the ONLY one that got through?
{^_^}
