You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Joe Acquisto-j4 <jo...@j4computers.com> on 2013/09/14 13:24:31 UTC
Score = 4.9
I've been having various issues with changes to local.cf not "taking".
Seem to have resolved these, yet there is one more issue that troubles. (mostly typos apparently, BTW)
So today, after getting changes to BAYES weights to "take", I found some SPAM gets thru anyway as the
score come up short, in my arithmetic. 4.9 and not 5.0. Does it have to do with the "- " in front of some tests?
You will see below what I mean:
-----
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on open-122
X-Spam-Level: ****
X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99,HTML_MESSAGE,
SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-Spam-Report:
* 5.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%
* [score: 1.0000]
* -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
* -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-----
Re: Score = 4.9
Posted by Joe Acquisto-j4 <jo...@j4computers.com>.
>>> On 9/14/2013 at 11:24 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk> wrote:
On 14.09.13 08:12, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>Yes the displayed scores are all rounded.
>Yet, just now, I got this:
>(which apparently did not round the same way ?? Just trying to understand)
>
>X-Spam-Level: **
>X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,HTML_MESSAGE,
> SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2
>X-Spam-Report:
> * -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
> * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
> * 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
> * 3.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
> * [score: 0.5131]
did you modify your BAYES scores? Please show us how?
what I've got from SA updates:
score BAYES_50 0 0 2.0 0.8
score BAYES_99 0 0 3.8 3.5
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
I feel like I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe.
in local.cf (for example)
score BAYES_99 5.0
Are there other values to state? I don't know what the others are for.
joe a.
Re: Score = 4.9
Posted by Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk>.
On 14.09.13 08:12, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>Yes the displayed scores are all rounded.
>Yet, just now, I got this:
>(which apparently did not round the same way ?? Just trying to understand)
>
>X-Spam-Level: **
>X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,HTML_MESSAGE,
> SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2
>X-Spam-Report:
> * -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
> * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
> * 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
> * 3.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
> * [score: 0.5131]
did you modify your BAYES scores? Please show us how?
what I've got from SA updates:
score BAYES_50 0 0 2.0 0.8
score BAYES_99 0 0 3.8 3.5
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
I feel like I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe.
Re: Score = 4.9
Posted by Joe Acquisto-j4 <jo...@j4computers.com>.
>>> On 9/14/2013 at 7:40 AM, RW <rw...@googlemail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 07:24:31 -0400
Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
> I've been having various issues with changes to local.cf not "taking".
>
> Seem to have resolved these, yet there is one more issue that
> troubles. (mostly typos apparently, BTW)
>
> So today, after getting changes to BAYES weights to "take", I found
> some SPAM gets thru anyway as the score come up short, in my
> arithmetic. 4.9 and not 5.0. Does it have to do with the "- " in
> front of some tests?
Yes the displayed scores are all rounded.
Yet, just now, I got this:
(which apparently did not round the same way ?? Just trying to understand)
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,HTML_MESSAGE,
SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-Spam-Report:
* -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
* -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
* 3.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
* [score: 0.5131]
Re: Score = 4.9
Posted by RW <rw...@googlemail.com>.
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 07:24:31 -0400
Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
> I've been having various issues with changes to local.cf not "taking".
>
> Seem to have resolved these, yet there is one more issue that
> troubles. (mostly typos apparently, BTW)
>
> So today, after getting changes to BAYES weights to "take", I found
> some SPAM gets thru anyway as the score come up short, in my
> arithmetic. 4.9 and not 5.0. Does it have to do with the "- " in
> front of some tests?
Yes the displayed scores are all rounded.
Re: Score = 4.9
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
Then likely some of those scores below are -0.01 or something similar so
they are bumping you JUST under 5.0
On 9/14/2013 12:29 PM, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
> >>> On 9/14/2013 at 10:47 AM, "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>
> wrote:
> On 9/14/2013 7:24 AM, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
> > I've been having various issues with changes to local.cf not "taking".
> >
> > Seem to have resolved these, yet there is one more issue that
> troubles. (mostly typos apparently, BTW)
> >
> > So today, after getting changes to BAYES weights to "take", I found
> some SPAM gets thru anyway as the
> > score come up short, in my arithmetic. 4.9 and not 5.0. Does it
> have to do with the "- " in front of some tests?
> >
> > You will see below what I mean:
> >
> > -----
> >
> > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on open-122
> > X-Spam-Level: ****
> > X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99,HTML_MESSAGE,
> > SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2
> > X-Spam-Report:
> > * 5.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%
> > * [score: 1.0000]
> > * -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
> > * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
> > * 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
> > -----
> Hi Joe,
>
> It likely has to do with rounding. That 5.0 is likely a 4.999 or
> something. So there is floor/ceiling silliness that isn't really
> apparent from the reports. I think there are also scenarios where the
> rounding / display is done differently and I unified that code in the
> trunk a year or so ago.
>
> Regards,
> KAM
>
>
> Thanks. For now I just changed the scores to n.1 just for fun.
> joe a.
>
--
*Kevin A. McGrail*
President
Peregrine Computer Consultants Corporation
3927 Old Lee Highway, Suite 102-C
Fairfax, VA 22030-2422
http://www.pccc.com/
703-359-9700 x50 / 800-823-8402 (Toll-Free)
703-359-8451 (fax)
KMcGrail@PCCC.com <ma...@pccc.com>
Re: Score = 4.9
Posted by Joe Acquisto-j4 <jo...@j4computers.com>.
>>> On 9/14/2013 at 10:47 AM, "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com> wrote:
On 9/14/2013 7:24 AM, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
> I've been having various issues with changes to local.cf not "taking".
>
> Seem to have resolved these, yet there is one more issue that troubles. (mostly typos apparently, BTW)
>
> So today, after getting changes to BAYES weights to "take", I found some SPAM gets thru anyway as the
> score come up short, in my arithmetic. 4.9 and not 5.0. Does it have to do with the "- " in front of some tests?
>
> You will see below what I mean:
>
> -----
>
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on open-122
> X-Spam-Level: ****
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99,HTML_MESSAGE,
> SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2
> X-Spam-Report:
> * 5.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%
> * [score: 1.0000]
> * -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
> * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
> * 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
> -----
Hi Joe,
It likely has to do with rounding. That 5.0 is likely a 4.999 or
something. So there is floor/ceiling silliness that isn't really
apparent from the reports. I think there are also scenarios where the
rounding / display is done differently and I unified that code in the
trunk a year or so ago.
Regards,
KAM
Thanks. For now I just changed the scores to n.1 just for fun.
joe a.
Re: Score = 4.9
Posted by RW <rw...@googlemail.com>.
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 10:47:33 -0400
Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> It likely has to do with rounding. That 5.0 is likely a 4.999 or
> something. So there is floor/ceiling silliness that isn't really
> apparent from the reports. I think there are also scenarios where
> the rounding / display is done differently and I unified that code in
> the trunk a year or so ago.
But what's surprising about it is that the two examples given differ
only by the Bayes result of 5.0 and 3.0 and they round down
in X-Spam-Level, but in X-Spam-Status the first rounds down and the
second rounds up.
X-Spam-Level: ****
X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.9 ...
X-Spam-Report:
* 5.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%
* [score: 1.0000]
* -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
* -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.0 ...
X-Spam-Report:
* -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
* -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
* 3.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
* [score: 0.5131]
I'm presuming that the OP has actually defined the Bayes scores at 5.0
and 3.0.
Re: Score = 4.9
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
On 9/14/2013 7:24 AM, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
> I've been having various issues with changes to local.cf not "taking".
>
> Seem to have resolved these, yet there is one more issue that troubles. (mostly typos apparently, BTW)
>
> So today, after getting changes to BAYES weights to "take", I found some SPAM gets thru anyway as the
> score come up short, in my arithmetic. 4.9 and not 5.0. Does it have to do with the "- " in front of some tests?
>
> You will see below what I mean:
>
> -----
>
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on open-122
> X-Spam-Level: ****
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99,HTML_MESSAGE,
> SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2
> X-Spam-Report:
> * 5.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%
> * [score: 1.0000]
> * -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
> * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
> * 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
> -----
Hi Joe,
It likely has to do with rounding. That 5.0 is likely a 4.999 or
something. So there is floor/ceiling silliness that isn't really
apparent from the reports. I think there are also scenarios where the
rounding / display is done differently and I unified that code in the
trunk a year or so ago.
Regards,
KAM