You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org> on 2007/10/17 13:41:59 UTC
Re: test my auto-generated ruleset
Larry Nedry writes:
> On 8/13/07 at 4:01 PM +0100 Justin Mason wrote:
> >I've been working on a new way to auto-generate body rules recently...
>
> Are these rules restricted to Spamassassin 3.2 or newer?
>
> The following is what I get when I dig 8.1.3.sought.rules.yerp.org. Notice
> the NXDOMAIN.
No, they should work on 3.1.x -- but in 3.2.x, they work a lot better
since they are compiled into C with "sa-compile".
I've fixed the backend to generate sa-update data for
*.1.3.sought.rules.yerp.org as well.
--j.
> Thanks for the great work!
>
> Nedry
>
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.3.1 <<>> 8.1.3.sought.rules.yerp.org
> ;; global options: printcmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 46528
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
>
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;8.1.3.sought.rules.yerp.org. IN A
>
> ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
> yerp.org. 3272 IN SOA ns1.fdntech.com.
> jm.jmason.org. 2007101601 3600 3600 604800 3600
>
> ;; Query time: 2 msec
> ;; SERVER: 208.109.96.1#53(208.109.96.1)
> ;; WHEN: Tue Oct 16 22:33:25 2007
> ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 106
Re: test my auto-generated ruleset
Posted by Larry Nedry <sp...@bluestreak.net>.
I've been using Justin Mason's auto-generated rule set since mid October
and am fairly happy with it. Up until Jan 11, false positives averaged
about 10% of the hits and I can live with that.
I noticed a surprising change on Jan 11, 2008. Before that day many of the
hits were on low scoring (< 20) spam which was very helpful. And I would
see many of these every day. Since Jan 10 I've only seen 4 messages that
hit on low scoring spam and the rest on very high scoring spam. I don't
get anymore FPs but as the spam scores for these messages are already
through the roof, at the moment, the usefulness of the current rule sets
have diminished. Though I assume the methods for creating the rules are
still under development and am looking forward to more improvements.
Was there a big change in the way rules were created around that time period?
Thanks for the great work!
Nedry
Re: test my auto-generated ruleset
Posted by Larry Nedry <sp...@bluestreak.net>.
I've been using Justin Mason's auto-generated rule set since mid October
and am fairly happy with it. Up until Jan 11, false positives averaged
about 10% of the hits and I can live with that.
I noticed a surprising change on Jan 11, 2008. Before that day many of the
hits were on low scoring (< 20) spam which was very helpful. And I would
see many of these every day. Since Jan 10 I've only seen 4 messages that
hit on low scoring spam and the rest on very high scoring spam. I don't
get anymore FPs but as the spam scores for these messages are already
through the roof, at the moment, the usefulness of the current rule sets
have diminished. Though I assume the methods for creating the rules are
still under development and am looking forward to more improvements.
Was there a big change in the way rules were created around that time period?
Thanks for the great work!
Nedry