From: | Robert Creager <Robert_Creager(at)LogicalChaos(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Will Trillich <will(at)serensoft(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [OT] Tom's/Marc's spam filters? |
Date: | 2004-04-20 04:43:00 |
Message-ID: | 20040419224300.33b93dab@thunder.mshome.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
When grilled further on (Mon, 19 Apr 2004 21:19:05 -0700),
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> confessed:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > Huh? I just use Spamassassin myself, with Razor/Pyzor/DCC and Bayes all
> > enabled ...
>
> I use exactly the same setup. But recently I've noticed that the
> spammers are getting smarter -- I think 20% of it is slipping by the
> filters. I'm going to need something better.
>
Have you played with the "spamassassin --report" feature? Works fairly well if
you can integrate it into your e-mail client and report a bunch of
messages as spam. It trains the Bayes filter and reports to Razor (at
the least).
Sylpheed Claws has actions (you use "spamassassin--report %F" as the action),
and it'll batch the report on all selected messages.
I find that after a 10-20 messages, it starts finding the ones that were
slipping through. Since February, I have 200 missed out of 4200.
Cheers,
Rob
--
22:28:27 up 3 days, 2:06, 3 users, load average: 3.24, 3.08, 3.45
Linux 2.6.5-01 #5 SMP Tue Apr 6 21:32:39 MDT 2004
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-04-20 05:06:18 | Re: [OT] Tom's/Marc's spam filters? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-04-20 04:41:44 | Re: [OT] Tom's/Marc's spam filters? |