Speaking of AWL...

[Matt Kettler]

At 02:53 PM 2/7/2005, Dave Duffner - NWCWEB.com wrote:
>         Randomly, without any plausible explanations we
>can find, I'll get e-mail tagged as SpamAssassin high
>scoring because of an AWL of like 80-90 range.  We
>use a lower-scoring system than most, so any adjustment
>like this is way over the top.
>
>         Strange part is that it's a positive adjustment
>of like 89 or 91?


High positive scores would tend to indicate GTUBE hangover, something which
is fixed in SA 3.0, but 2.6 suffers from.


>  Not a negative?

First, the AWL is *not* a whitelist. It's a score avenger, and has both
black and white effects. People who have in the past sent low-scoring
emails get any high-scoring emails pushed down. People who send lots of
spam get any low-scoring emails pushed up.

That said, there's no reason to expect negative only scores from the AWL.
In fact, you may even see positive scores in nonspam, and negative scores
in spam, and that's normal in many cases

See:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AwlWrongWay



>         Still have no complete grip on the AWL and where
>it thinks it's getting it's information from.


Read the FAQ on the AWL for details of how it works:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AutoWhitelist

------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!