Autolearn as ham with a positive score.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Autolearn as ham with a positive score.

Reio Remma
Hello!

I just noticed autolearn=ham for a message with a positive spam score. Is that normal?

bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam is set to a negative figure in the SpamAssassin config file.

X-Spam-Flag: NO                                                                                                                                                                                                  
X-Spam-Score: 2.32                                                                                                                                                                                               
X-Spam-Level: **                                                                                                                                                                                                 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.32 tagged_above=-3 required=3 tests=[
BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1,
NO_DNS_FOR_FROM=1, TXREP=1.719] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no

Thanks,
Reio

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Autolearn as ham with a positive score.

Bill Cole
On 12 Jun 2018, at 3:34, Reio Remma wrote:

> Hello!
>
> I just noticed *autolearn=ham* for a message with a positive spam
> score. Is that normal?

No, but it is also not especially remarkable. The final operative score
is not the score that is used to determine autolearning.

> bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam is set to a negative figure in the
> SpamAssassin config file.

The fact that it is "a negative figure" is pretty much useless
information. That it were -0.001 or -20 would be useful information.

> X-Spam-Flag: NO
> X-Spam-Score: 2.32
> X-Spam-Level: **
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.32 tagged_above=-3 required=3 tests=[
> BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,
> DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1,
> NO_DNS_FOR_FROM=1, TXREP=1.719] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no

Your configuration is rather unusual (3 is a VERY low threshold) but
that's not why this got autolearned as ham. The score used for autolearn
thresholds does not use Bayes or TxRep/AWL scores. Detailscan be found
with 'perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::AutoLearnThreshold'

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Autolearn as ham with a positive score.

Reio Remma
> On 12 Jun 2018, at 17:11, Bill Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 12 Jun 2018, at 3:34, Reio Remma wrote:

>> I just noticed *autolearn=ham* for a message with a positive spam score. Is that normal?

>> X-Spam-Flag: NO
>> X-Spam-Score: 2.32
>> X-Spam-Level: **
>> X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.32 tagged_above=-3 required=3 tests=[
>> BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,
>> DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1,
>> NO_DNS_FOR_FROM=1, TXREP=1.719] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
>
> Your configuration is rather unusual (3 is a VERY low threshold) but that's not why this got autolearned as ham. The score used for autolearn thresholds does not use Bayes or TxRep/AWL scores. Detailscan be found with 'perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::AutoLearnThreshold'

Thanks, that’s what I was looking for and half suspected. My actual spam threshold is 6 (set in amavisd-new).

Autolearn ham threshold was indeed -0.1, lowered it some more now.

Thanks,
Reio
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Autolearn as ham with a positive score.

Benny Pedersen-2
In reply to this post by Reio Remma
Reio Remma skrev den 2018-06-12 09:34:

> X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.32 tagged_above=-3 required=3 tests=[
> BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,
> DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1,
> NO_DNS_FOR_FROM=1, TXREP=1.719] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no

one of the symbols have tflags nice or tflags learn or combination of
them