Ok, running it as user amavis, the bayes result is breaks
completely (no scoring at all) but the URIBL is still there
so a total of 9 points
Pete Barnwell wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-12-27 at 12:55 -0500, munroe wrote:
>
>> update:
>>
>> taking a message that scored 1.3 as per the ham
cache and running it
>> through spamassassin -t it got scored as 13.7.
>>
>> This is what maia reports as the score:
>>
>> 1.765 MARKETING_PARTNERS Claims you registered
with a partner
>> 0.966 NO_OBLIGATION There is no obligation
>> 0.113 HTML_90_100 Message is 90% to 100% HTML
>> 0.001 HTML_MESSAGE HTML included in message
>> -2.599 BAYES_00 Bayesian spam probability is 0 to
1%
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> And this is what Spamassassin -t reports as the
score
>>
>> 1.8 MARKETING_PARTNERS BODY: Claims you
registered with a partner
>> 1.0 NO_OBLIGATION BODY: There is
no obligation
>> 0.1 HTML_90_100 BODY:
Message is 90% to 100% HTML
>> 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML
included in message
>> 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY:
Bayesian spam
>> probability is 99 to 100%
>>
[score: 1.0000]
>> 3.0 URIBL_BLACK Contains an
URL listed in the
>> URIBL blacklist
>>
[URIs:
>> trade-in-value.com selectiveresorts.com]
>> 2.1 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL
listed in the WS
>> SURBL blocklist
>>
[URIs:
>> trade-in-value.com]
>> 3.0 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL
listed in the OB
>> SURBL blocklist
>>
[URIs:
>> selectiveresorts.com]
>>
>> The 2 differences is the Bayes reporting and the
URIBL, I manually ran
>> the message 15minutes after it was received and did
not do any
>> additional training to the bayes. This morning I
ran sa-update and
>> load-sa-rules.pl and everything is synched or so it
reports.
>> Anythoughts as to why the difference?
>>
>
> did you run it through as the user that amavisd runs as
the second time?
> If not you'll be using a different Bayes cache...
>
> Rgds
>
> Pete
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Maia-users mailing list
Maia-users renaissoft.com
http://www.renaissoft.com/mailman/listinfo/maia-users
|