Daniel Staal DStaal at
Thu Feb 20 18:59:52 UTC 2014

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

> 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 or user_prefs should be fine, but I'd avoid the 
definition lines.  (`/etc/mail/spmassassin/` 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 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.

More information about the NANOG mailing list