On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 11:50:19AM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 02:30:18PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> [snip]
> > reduced. For example, we recently dropped the SA threshold to 4 in
> > response to a combination of Santiago's bug report and an onslaught of
> > spam last night which scored between 4 and 5.
> [snip]
>
> It might make sense to use an adaptive spam filter (like bogofilter) in
> combination with SA. That's what I use at home, and it catches 95% of the
> spam I get. I was using SA alone for a while, and like you said, lowering
> the score to 4 catches a lot more spam. However, I also found that score 4
> also introduces too many false positives, so I spent a long time tweaking
> scores and creating custom rules. But now that I integrated it with
> bogofilter, I find that I don't have to spend as much effort to revise
> SA scores and rules as often (in fact, not at all if I weren't such a
> perfectionist :-P).
Spamassassin is due out in few weeks, and it includes bogo-ish features plus
an auto feed system so that mails with an score higher than a certain number
(usually something like 15) feeds back the bogo-ish engine.
And of course can be set with a common user for token storage.
Cheers,
Mooch
--
Jesus Climent | Unix SysAdm | Helsinki, Finland | pumuki.hispalinux.es
GPG: 1024D/86946D69 BB64 2339 1CAA 7064 E429 7E18 66FC 1D7F 8694 6D69
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Registered Linux user #66350 proudly using Debian Sid & Linux 2.4.20
This was to be my final hit, but let's be clear about this. There's final
hits and final hits. What kind was this to be?
--Renton (Trainspotting)
Attachment:
pgpMTEsNtptFw.pgp
Description: PGP signature