You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by Joe Quinn <jq...@pccc.com> on 2014/09/12 14:55:52 UTC

FP on BANG_GUAR

I just saw a false positive coming from this rule, which managed to get 
a score of 2.4 from just one word:
     body BANG_GUAR                 /\bguaranteed?\!/i

I put in a cap of 1.0 which should keep RuleQA from going nuts with that 
rule.

Re: FP on BANG_GUAR

Posted by Axb <ax...@gmail.com>.

On 09/12/2014 02:55 PM, Joe Quinn wrote:
> I just saw a false positive coming from this rule, which managed to get
> a score of 2.4 from just one word:
>      body BANG_GUAR                 /\bguaranteed?\!/i
>
> I put in a cap of 1.0 which should keep RuleQA from going nuts with that
> rule.

Wow - that rules is so 2004

imo it could be dropped...  :)

Re: FP on BANG_GUAR

Posted by Joe Quinn <jq...@pccc.com>.

On 9/12/2014 9:26 AM, Axb wrote:
> On 09/12/2014 02:55 PM, Joe Quinn wrote:
>> I just saw a false positive coming from this rule, which managed to get
>> a score of 2.4 from just one word:
>>      body BANG_GUAR                 /\bguaranteed?\!/i
>>
>> I put in a cap of 1.0 which should keep RuleQA from going nuts with that
>> rule.
>
>
> you added the score in 20_phrases.cf
> instead of modifying 50_scores.cf
>
> fixed.
Doh! I looked in 50_scores.cf initially and did not notice that only the 
top third of the file is automatically generated.

Re: FP on BANG_GUAR

Posted by Axb <ax...@gmail.com>.

On 09/12/2014 02:55 PM, Joe Quinn wrote:
> I just saw a false positive coming from this rule, which managed to get
> a score of 2.4 from just one word:
>      body BANG_GUAR                 /\bguaranteed?\!/i
>
> I put in a cap of 1.0 which should keep RuleQA from going nuts with that
> rule.


you added the score in 20_phrases.cf
instead of modifying 50_scores.cf

fixed.