| ||
Wed 2024-11-20
Tue 2024-11-19
Mon 2024-11-18
Sun 2024-11-17
Love, Acceptance, and Screeching Modems Sat 2024-11-16
Fri 2024-11-15
Search
Archives
2023
12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
One good site
MDN
Nelson Minar
Blog licensed under a Creative Commons License
|
I've been a faithful spamassassin user for a long
time. Never thought much about how it worked, just been happy.
But a lot of spam is leaking through the last month, so I went looking
for a tuneup.
I tried my new spamassassin setup on 594 emails my old
spamassassin setup said were not spam. The new setup correctly
identified 342 as spam and 247 as non-spam. It identified 5 messages as
non-spam when in fact they were spam, and a reassuring 0
messages as spam which were not spam. This is all excellent!
Of the 342 newly-found spam, 303 were caught by the Bayesian filter, 172 by Pyzor, and 160+ by Razor. Update 2004-01-16: I made a boneheaded mistake in this evaluation. I trained the Bayesian filter on some data, then tested it on the same data. D'oh. The reality is the Bayesian filter is still much better than without, but not quite as stellar. |
|
