Re: CrossAssassin results
In article <[🔎] 20040410221745.GA5853@keid.carnet.hr> you write:
>On Fri, Apr 09, 2004 at 07:24:26PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote:
>> >> We are getting about 700 nonspam messages a day to the BTS, and about 30
>> >> spams a day are making it past spamassassin.
>> >This is reverse from how it's supposed to be used -- the mail should first
>> >go through CA and only then through SA. Why did you do it the other way
>> All the messages are going through both crossassassin and
>> spamassassin. I'm using the spamassassin score to whitelist messages,
>> since there are a significant number of non-spam messages that are
>> sent to four or more bugs.
$ egrep '^ ok .* ([4-9]|[1-9][0-9]+)$' /org/bugs.debian.org/log/spamscan.log | wc -l
70 since crossassasin was enabled about 44 hours ago.
The one nonspam that got caught was reinjected after I added a new
spamassassin rule (making it score < 0) so is included in the 70. (It
was sent to request, and I had not examined messages going to
$ egrep '^ spam [0-3]\.' /org/bugs.debian.org/log/spamscan.log | wc -l
244 spams were caught by crossassassin in the same period.
Blars Blarson email@example.com
With Microsoft, failure is not an option. It is a standard feature.