Am 15.03.2016 um 22:24 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt:
Baloney - spamoney!!! I do not use autolearning, and ALL my spam is either hand-selected or it comes from honeypot addresses that have NEVER been on my domains - I get these honeypot addresses by scanning the mail log and looking for guesses by spammers - when I see a popular address in the "guess bin" I set it up as a honeypot - and within 6 months it's getting thousands of spams a week. And the ham comes from me and from a select group of users who have large amounts of mail stored on the system that is all clean. Bayes is NOT the answer to everything!!!!
no, but to most things if your corpora is well maintained and don't forget already learned samples - otherwise it's easy to trick out over the long and won't catch seasonal junk or end in miss-classified seasonal ham
we have scripts checking any samples against current bayes classification and ignore them if they already have BAYES_99, there is not much left to train and with the data of a whole year have fun to bypass it, especially when it's scored proper
On 3/15/2016 2:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:Am 15.03.2016 um 22:01 schrieb David B Funk:Actually this is one case where Bayes may not be a help. Our campus recently outsourced almost all users to O365. As a consequence our Bayes gets a -lot- of ham from O365 and therefore has most of its fingerprints tagged as ham. Thus it takes a very spammy message passed thu O365 to get anything but BAYES_00get rid of autolearning, maintain your bayes by hand and strip most headers from samples and all that problems are gone away especially strip Received headers from samples and put one generic on top
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
