Re: Kmail, pop3, spam...

[Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

forgot to mention - you *never ever* will be able to reach a compareable 
hitrate with your local scanning compared to a global bayes feeded with 
currently 85000 spam and ham samples and we are *really* a small player 
in filtering

not only if it comes to filter out spam - also to prevent false 
positives based on ham samples

/etc/mail/spamassassin/local-*.cf
score BAYES_00 -3.5
score BAYES_05 -2.0
score BAYES_20 -1.0
score BAYES_40 -0.5
score BAYES_50 1.5
score BAYES_60 3.5
score BAYES_80 5.5
score BAYES_95 6.5
score BAYES_99 7.5
score BAYES_999 0.4

0      62431    SPAM
0      21895    HAM
0    2585854    TOKEN

BAYES_00        14394   74.24 %
BAYES_05          415    2.14 %
BAYES_20          490    2.52 %
BAYES_40          474    2.44 %
BAYES_50         1495    7.71 %
BAYES_60          195    1.00 %     8.74 % (OF TOTAL BLOCKED)
BAYES_80          158    0.81 %     7.08 % (OF TOTAL BLOCKED)
BAYES_95          147    0.75 %     6.58 % (OF TOTAL BLOCKED)
BAYES_99         1619    8.35 %    72.56 % (OF TOTAL BLOCKED)
BAYES_999        1442    7.43 %    64.63 % (OF TOTAL BLOCKED)

DELIVERED       26962   94.28 %
DNSWL           26683   93.31 %
SPF             18807   65.77 %
SPF/DKIM WL      8088   28.28 %
SHORTCIRCUIT     9185   32.12 %

BLOCKED          2231    7.80 %
SPAMMY           2119    7.41 %    94.97 % (OF TOTAL BLOCKED)

Am 14.03.2016 um 19:40 schrieb Reindl Harald:
> Am 14.03.2016 um 18:45 schrieb P. Gueckel:
> > Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > How do you expect them to filter spam without
> > scanning your messages?
> >
> > Good point. Scanning is a privacy breach that likely
> > violates privacy legislation. All the more reason to
> > disable the feature and do your own scanning
>
> *lol*
>
> we have days where 500000 mails for a few hundret users are rejected
> straight ahead by postscreen-scoring on the MTA long before
> content-filters become a topic
>
> have fun receive that all, scan it local and what about false positives
> you overlook - on our MX servers *any* message above 8.0 socre points is
> rejected unconditionally, so a sane sender generates *it's own bounce*
> to his enduser and nothing is silently dropped
>
> between 5.5 and 7.9 points it get tagged *but not* moved somwehere, just
> a SA header and a mark in the subject - the user is responsible at it#s
> own how to handle such mails by headers and/or subject
>
> 8-10% of all mails not rejected straight away because bad reputation
> based ona mix of 50 combined dnsbl/ndswl are rejcted by milter
>
> have fun doing that local where you *must not* reject and backscatter

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
kde mailing list
kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx