On 2017-08-08 15:20, Scott wrote:

> Another new one  big score, auto-learn disabled.  This one is fairly small.  
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=29.428 tag=-9999 tag2=5 kill=6.4
>         tests=[DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=1.076, DCC_CHECK=3.2,
>         HTML_EXTRA_CLOSE=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
>         HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TAG=0.635, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.105, MISSING_MID=0.14,
>         NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.365,
>         RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=2.43, RAZOR2_CHECK=2.5,
>         RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT=1.644, RDNS_NONE=1.274, SPF_FAIL=4,
>         WEIRD_QUOTING=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
> Can you tell if this one has the 3 point match?


when I tried to use the autolearn feature I was as confused as you are.
As far as I remember, the 3 point each from header and body is not the
only requirement; the full truth is that some rules are "privileged" and
can contribute to autolearning while others cannot.  I found it opaque
in the extreme and essentially unpredictable, and so I stopped
autolearning and hacked up some scripts that put duplicate of each ham
message into a folder which is then processed by sa-learn from a
cronjob, with sufficient delay that I can review the contents and remove
any false negatives; and similarly with spam, excluding the utterly
horrible category which just goes to /dev/null.

It may not be possible for you to adopt such a process if your volume is
high, but OTOH in that case you probably have users to help you :)

I think this is what RW is telling you, too.

FWIW, this is documented (sort of) by:

perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::AutoLearnThreshold

Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet,
if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup.
Do obvious transformation on domain to reply privately _only_ on Usenet.

Reply via email to