Near capitable punishment for all capitals?

[Mark <ad...@asarian-host.net>]

Just noticed this on spam:

 

2.1 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS          Subject is all capitals

 

I know I can change scores at will, of course,

but a default of 2.1, that seems a mite excessive, no?

 

-      Mark

Re: Near capitable punishment for all capitals?

[Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>]

Mark wrote:
>
> Just noticed this on spam:
>
>  
>
> 2.1 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS          Subject is all capitals
>
>  
>
> I know I can change scores at will, of course,
>
> but a default of 2.1, that seems a mite excessive, no?
>
>  
>
> -      Mark
>
2.1 is quite low compared to the default required_score.

if 2.1 is close to, or above, your required_score, you might want to
consider that lowering it is likely to create false positives..

Re: Near capitable punishment for all capitals?

[mouss <mo...@ml.netoyen.net>]

Mark a écrit :
> Just noticed this on spam:
> 
>  
> 
> 2.1 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS          Subject is all capitals
> 
>  
> 
> I know I can change scores at will, of course,
> 
> but a default of 2.1, that seems a mite excessive, no?
> 

remember: default score are computed automatically.

and while some legit senders might use all caps subjects, they need
other patterns to reach the 5.0 threshold. so this shouldn't FP too
easily (or if it does, the FP would occure because of other ules anyway).

on the spam hit side, this helps catching those "URGENT" , "CONFIRM
RECEIPT", "CONGRATULATION", ... fraud mail.

Re: Near capitable punishment for all capitals?

[RW <rw...@googlemail.com>]

On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 22:48:50 GMT
Mark <ad...@asarian-host.net> wrote:

> 2.1 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS          Subject is all capitals
> 
>  
> 
> I know I can change scores at will, of course,
> 
> but a default of 2.1, that seems a mite excessive, no?


Seems reasonable to me, and it's not as if someone just thought it up.

Re: Near capitable punishment for all capitals?

[LuKreme <kr...@kreme.com>]

On 6-Apr-2009, at 08:57, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> I've never had problem with score of this rule. Subject is a thing the
> sender can easily change when you told him not to do this.


That's not even the issue. It's simply that all caps subjects are  
quite rare in ham and quite common in spam.  A 2.1 is unlikely to push  
a true ham message into the spam range.

-- 
There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don t
	know what can be done to fix it. This is it: Only nut cases
	want to be president.

Re: Near capitable punishment for all capitals?

[James Wilkinson <sa...@aprilcottage.co.uk>]

Mark wrote:
> Eh, it's no biggie, really, I was just surprised it scores as high as,
> say, being listed on DCC. But then again, who actually *does* write in all
> caps, except a spammer? :)

Quite a few of my employer’s correspondents: and not just in the
subject!

I know a number of my users who do a lot of bulk data entry have Caps
Lock permanently on: much of our company data is in all-caps, and users
are strongly encouraged to keep new data looking the same way. And some
of them don’t see any reason to turn it off for a quick email. So site
config has a much lower score for this rule.

I’m not sure it’s worth putting these emails in a corpus: once you start
cherrypicking emails to make a point, the automatic score generation is
no longer statistically relevant.

James.

-- 
E-mail:     james@ | “The duke had a mind that ticked like a clock and, like a
aprilcottage.co.uk | clock, it regularly went cuckoo.”
                   |     -- Terry Pratchett, Wyrd Sisters

RE: Near capitable punishment for all capitals?

[Mark <ad...@asarian-host.net>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Matus UHLAR - fantomas [mailto:uhlar@fantomas.sk] 
Sent: maandag 6 april 2009 16:59
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Near capitable punishment for all capitals?

On 05.04.09 22:48, Mark wrote:

> > Just noticed this on spam:
> > 
> > 2.1 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS          Subject is all capitals
> 
> If it was a spam, why do you care? If that would be FP, we may talk
> about it.

Eh, it's no biggie, really, I was just surprised it scores as high as,
say, being listed on DCC. But then again, who actually *does* write in all
caps, except a spammer? :)

- Mark

Re: Near capitable punishment for all capitals?

[Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk>]

On 05.04.09 22:48, Mark wrote:
> Just noticed this on spam:
> 
> 2.1 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS          Subject is all capitals

If it was a spam, why do you care? If that would be FP, we may talk about
it.

> I know I can change scores at will, of course,
> but a default of 2.1, that seems a mite excessive, no?

I've never had problem with score of this rule. Subject is a thing the
sender can easily change when you told him not to do this.

-- 
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.
Microsoft dick is soft to do no harm