spamassassin

Thu Feb 20 18:59:52 UTC 2014

--As of February 20, 2014 11:22:34 AM +0800, Randy Bush is alleged to have 
said:

>> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/spamassassin/users/183433
>
> as blabby as nanog, and not really specific
>
>> body BAYES_99 eval:check_bayes('0.99', '0.999')
>> body BAYES_999 eval:check_bayes('0.999', '1.00')
>> score BAYES_99 0 0 3.8 3.5
>> score BAYES_999 0 0 4.0 3.7
>
> and this is a replacement for both 999 and 99?

--As for the rest, it is mine.

It's a redefinition of both, yes.  It was partly given in the original 
thread as a help to understand what was happening - and it was listed as a 
*temporary* fix, until the rule has been stabilized.

Discussion on both of these rules is ongoing at the moment, and I wouldn't 
advise the above fix unless you are following it. It's likely that it will 
double-score some of your spam, or drastically change the meanings of the 
rules from what is shipped, if not now than soon.  Putting the 'score' 
lines in your local.cf or user_prefs should be fine, but I'd avoid the 
definition lines.  (`/etc/mail/spmassassin/local.cf` is the usual main 
editable config file for spamassissin, and `~/.spamassassin/user_prefs` is 
per-user configs, if you have that.)

The correct score has been pushed, as Simon Perreault mentioned.  Taking 
out anything you've done and running sa-update should get you a working 
ruleset.  (If you've increased the score of either one in the normal 
fashions - using local.cf or user_prefs - that should be fine.)

Daniel T. Staal

---------------------------------------------------------------
This email copyright the author.  Unless otherwise noted, you
are expressly allowed to retransmit, quote, or otherwise use
the contents for non-commercial purposes.  This copyright will
expire 5 years after the author's death, or in 30 years,
whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of
local copyright law.
---------------------------------------------------------------