Re: [spamassassin] [OFFTOPIC] Opinions on DSPAM

[Don Krause <dk...@optivus.com>]

On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 11:32, Mathieu Nantel wrote:
> Good day list,
> 
> As I've read a few articles on DSPAM claiming that it's better/faster/sexier 
> than spamassassin, I would appreciate having this list's comment on DSPAM. 
> I'm sure quite a few of you have tried it and might have some interesting 
> experiences to share. My understanding is that DSPAM relies solely on 
> algorithms (Bayes, CHI^2), and that complications arise when you have to 
> teach your users on how to train the system (which SA doesn't require as it's 
> based on other things aside from Bayes).
> 
> I'm not wanting to start a church war - please be objective should you reply.
> 
> Thanks.

I'm running it on a test system, with few (~15) users. It's been working
and trained for about 4 months, and has yet to achieve better than %75
percent accuracy.

One user in particular, gets about 500 Spam per month, to 3 good emails
per month. In this case, DSPAM fails terribly, failing to tag ANYTHING
as spam. In three months of constant training, it claims to have
achieved 102% accuracy, while clearly passing everything.

DSPAM has a nice user interface, but apparently requires way too much
user intervention in the beginning to be very useful.

YMMV

-- 
Don