-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 24 March 2004 03:55 am, Nigel Wade wrote: > Charles Howse wrote: > > jdow has pointed me to a page with custom rulesets: > > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CustomRulesets > > but I'm still interested in comments or generic settings for my > > ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs file. Anyone care to share? > > I'm not sure there really are any generic settings in user_prefs. The > entire point of user_prefs is for user specific custom settings. > > One thing I always do, however, with a new install of SA is to set any > tests which have negative scores to zero. The spammers are no longer > stupid, and they know SA is used in many servers so deliberately target SA. > If there's a way to reduce the SA score they will exploit it, so I remove > the negative scores before they get a chance. One specific case was when SA > assigned a negative score to a Subject: field with Re: in it. How many > spams now have Re: in the subject? Now that I have had time to think a little more, I have another question about training spamassassin. I have the following folders in KMail, that should always contain ham: Fedora - msgs from this list, which I normally trash after reading, unless I consider them worth moving to the Saved folder inbox - msgs from which I have manually eliminated the spam by moving them to the Spam folder Kent - old and new msgs from one of my whitelisted buddies that I wish to keep forever Saved - old and new msgs from any source that I wish to keep forever Stooges - msgs from the computers on my home lan that I expire after 2 days (mostly things like logwatch reports) The question is: is it wrong to train spamassassin by running sa --learn on the same msgs ( + or - a few) over and over? For example, should I run sa --learn regularly on the Saved folder, which contains msgs that I have had for a long time, in addition to new msgs. I would think that I could whitelist the msgs from the computers on my home lan, and not run sa --learn on them. Msgs in the Kent folder are also on the whitelist. Does that make sense? - -- Charles Howse Jackson, TN Registered Linux user # 347576 (http://counter.li.org) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAYYqf/S+VsB9RMKgRAsdKAJwIcxCMwePTw59AjwaQhojNRYNT9gCfd/lx xGesZgrAgAPA+nkxF62tcqI= =YD03 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
