Aug 24, 2006, at 10:11 AM, lists (AT) zeta (DOT) net wrote:
Since upgrading to 3.14, when I turn on bayes auto-learn with:
bayes_auto_learn 1
and I set the learn boundaries with:
-3.5
15.5
I get unexpected auto-learning. Example: I just saw a spam come
through that scored 9.9, which is enough for it to be tagged as
spam,
but it should not be auto-learned as spam. But, in the header it
clearly reads:
X-Spam-Status:
Yes, score=9.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_99,
DATE_IN_PAST_03_06,DCC_CHECK,DIGEST_MULTIPLE,HTML_ 40_50,HTML_MESSAGE
,
MIME_HTMLNLY,RAZR2_CHECK,RCVD_IN_WHIS_INVALID autolearn=spam
version=3.1.4
Any ideas?
>SA does not autolearn based on the final message score. So, toss
>the 9.9
>out the window. That's not the number SA compares to the 15.5.
>>
>For learning SA uses what the message score would have been if: 1)
>the
>AWL is off. 2) Bayes was disabled, including shifting what
>scoreset is
>used for all the other rules. 3) all white/blacklists are
>disabled. This
>is often *quite* different from the final score.
>>
>However, in this case I don't entirely understand The default
>SA 3.1
>scores are:
>>
>score DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 0.736 0 1.122 0.478
>score DCC_CHECK 0 1.37 0 2.17
>score DIGEST_MULTIPLE 0 0.233 0 0.765
>score HTML_40_50 0.611 0 0.497 0.496
>score HTML_MESSAGE 0.001
>score MIME_HTMLNLY 0.414 0.001 0.389 0.001
>score RAZR2_CHECK 0 0.5 0 0.5
>score RCVD_IN_WHIS_INVALID 0 2.151 0 2.234
>>
>Adding the set1 scores up, the learning score should have been 4.753.
>>
>Have you modified any rule scores?
Here's another example:
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.4 (2006-07-25) on localhost
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=6.0 required=5.0 tests=ADVANCE_FEE_1,BAYES_95,
DNS_FRM_RFC_ABUSE,DNS_FRM_RFC_PST,SPF_HELPASS
autolearn=spam
version=3.1.4
I just can't see why it is autolearning everything that is tagged as
spam.
If anyone has any ideas, i'd appreciate it!
Regards,
Devin