Bayes Poisoning? Spam with negative BAYES Scores

[Ken Anderson]

Just .02..
For most of these, the bayes poisoning seems to be done in the
text/plain portion of the email, while the html part is spammy.
SA should be able to ignore the text/plain part completely if there is a
spammy html version. I'm not sure what/if anything has been done along
these lines.

Ken A.
Pacific.Net


Nathan Johanson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> A recent thread made brief reference to "bayes poisoning". We're
> currently using SpamAssassin 2.60 and will upgrade to version 2.61
> shortly, but we have seen an increasing amount of spam slipping through
> the filters with negative BAYES scores. Very annoying:
>
> X-tcpnetworks-MailScanner: Found to be clean
> X-tcpnetworks-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin
> (score=-3.361,
>  required 4, BAYES_00 -4.90, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_06 1.44,
>  HTML_MESSAGE 0.10)
>
> Is anyone else seeing this sort of thing? Any recommendations for
> combating it? I noted the links to BigEvil custom rules (posted
> earlier), but I'm starting to wonder if Bayes usefulness is starting to
> dwindle. Is there some way to prevent this poisoning?
>
>
> help too.
>
> Nathan
>
>