OK, so I don't think auto-learn works on spam.  What about HAM?

I've raised the floor to auto-learn HAM to 1.  Before anyone gives me any
grief, it's just for testing.  I'll rebuild the bayes db from a corpus when
I get it working.

So SPAM takes the 3-way patch, 3 from the header, 3 from the body.  but what
about HAM.  Since the default for autolearn is much lower than 6, I presume
this same limitation does not apply.

So hams should be free to auto-learn with any score that is below my
threshold (1).

Like this one, right? (assuming it is not already learned):

Aug 10 14:21:46 tn2 amavis[3231]: (03231-06) Passed CLEAN {RelayedInbound},
[]:43757 [] ESMTP/LMTP
<owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org> -> <techlis...@myvirt.com>,
(ESMTPS://[]:43757 < ESMTPS:// <,
Queue-ID: 5EE363BF5, Message-ID:
<018901d3120d$c8473120$58d59360$@mefox.org>, mail_id: JkAvl418yTui, b:
ZbU4iXvCD, Hits: -5.799, size: 5533, queued_as: BD81F3EE7, Subject: "RE:
reloading postfix with systemd", From: <n...@mefox.org>, X-Mailer:
Microsoft_Outlook_16.0, helo=english-breakfast.cloud9.net, Tests:
autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no, autolearnscore=-2.299, 4376 ms

Now this sender and a similar message would have been in my my corpus so I
don't expect IT to learn, but I'd expect others to.  

View this message in context: 
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to