JD_ rule set?

[benthere-nine <be...@yahoo.com>]

jdow wrote:
> 
> From: "Scott Friedman" <sc...@freedyhome.com>
> 
>> Has anyone figured a good recipe for blocking these type of spam yet?
>> 
>> I get 3-5 per day to each user on my mail server.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: Work has been closed permanently
>> Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 21:28:50 +0600
>> From: Leslie Hilton <gi...@talk21.com>
>> To: <sc...@freedyhome.com>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Attention  ,
>> 
>> Find out how to generate 1.5 - 3.5k per day from your home.
>> 
>> 800.671.9007
>> 
>> Phone me at my number if you can return calls.
>> 
>> Thanks Alot,
>> Leslie Hilton
> 
> The lowest scoring one of those puppies to hit here ran up a score
> of 7.3:
> -1.5 JD_SENDER_RELAY        Good list with Sender header
>  0.0 DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME     Domain Keys: policy says domain signs some
> mails
>  3.0 BAYES_95               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 95 to 99%
>                             [score: 0.9771]
>  0.0 JD_VHI_BAYES           JD_VHI_BAYES
>  0.0 JD_HI_BAYES            JD_HI_BAYES
>  3.8 JD_HI_BAYES_LKML       LKML likely spam
>  2.0 JD_VHI_BAYES_LKML      LKML very likely spam
> 

Which rule set are the JD_ scores from?

Thanks,

benthere9@yahoo.com
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Been-getting-alot-of-these-lately..-anyone-else--tf2447268.html#a6837212
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: JD_ rule set?

[Benny Pedersen <me...@junc.org>]

On Tue, October 17, 2006 18:55, jdow wrote:

> to subtract even more points to offset various rules that trigger
> on patches, source listings, and oops dumps.)

this mail list have enorm spams on it, seams that no one cares to kill it at
maillist server level, hmm, does spammers sponcer this maillist ? :-)

-- 
"This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails."

Re: JD_ rule set?

[jdow <jd...@earthlink.net>]

From: "benthere-nine" <be...@yahoo.com>
> jdow wrote:

>> The lowest scoring one of those puppies to hit here ran up a score
>> of 7.3:
>> -1.5 JD_SENDER_RELAY        Good list with Sender header
>>  0.0 DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME     Domain Keys: policy says domain signs some
>> mails
>>  3.0 BAYES_95               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 95 to 99%
>>                             [score: 0.9771]
>>  0.0 JD_VHI_BAYES           JD_VHI_BAYES
>>  0.0 JD_HI_BAYES            JD_HI_BAYES
>>  3.8 JD_HI_BAYES_LKML       LKML likely spam
>>  2.0 JD_VHI_BAYES_LKML      LKML very likely spam
>> 
> 
> Which rule set are the JD_ scores from?

Personal experimental META rules components.

HI is 80, 95, and 99. VHI is 95 and 99.

I also have a rule that detects LKML, the Linux Kernel Mailing List.
It has a -1.5 score. The HI and VHI rules combined with LKML add
several points to offset the lowering. (LO and VLO rules also exist
to subtract even more points to offset various rules that trigger
on patches, source listings, and oops dumps.)

{^_^}