MailScanner vs. SpamKiller

[Martin Hepworth]

Max

last week several peopl (including myself) posted what extra rules we 
run for SA..

have a look in the archives.

Without Bayes I'm getting about 95% hit rate, with bayes about 99.5%, 
yes bayes really does make that much difference! I'd really suggest you 
spend some time to give it the initial 200 instances of spam and ham...


--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300


Max Kipness wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
>  
> 
> I’ve been running MailScanner for a while for a few clients. I just 
> signed on a new client that was using SpamKiller by Mcafee I believe. 
> The main reason for the service is for queueing their mail when their 
> Exchange server goes down which it has been every weekend due to 
> scheduled power outages. However, they are still relying on the Spam and 
> Virus filtration.
> 
>  
> 
> The problem is that they decided to turn off SpamKiller the other day, 
> and started getting spam that they assumed MailScanner would stop. 
> Bottom line is that when SpamKiller is enabled, they get close to no 
> spam at all. Some of the samples that they sent me are the very basic 
> couple of lines type of spam that gets a very low score. Here is what I 
> have running:
> 
>  
> 
> SpamAssassin 2.63
> 
> ORDB-RBL
> 
> spamhaus.org
> 
> spamcop.net
> 
> dsbl.org
> 
> abuseat.org
> 
> blitzed.org
> 
> Razor2
> 
>  
> 
> I’m not doing Bayes at the moment as it seems to be a real hassle doing 
> the training.
> 
>  
> 
> So my question is what can I do to improve the whole system? What 
> tweaks? Will DCC help out a lot? Are there any better RBLs? Tweaks to 
> SpamAssassin?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Max
> 

**********************************************************************

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept
for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean.

**********************************************************************