Beta 4.50.4 released -- faster than 4.49

Adri Koppes adrik at SALESMANAGER.NL
Thu Jan 5 12:02:23 GMT 2006

> From: MailScanner mailing list 
> [mailto:MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Christiaan den Besten
> Sent: donderdag 5 januari 2006 12:09
> Subject: Re: Beta 4.50.4 released -- faster than 4.49
> > I would like to get a set of timeouts we basically agree on, then 
> > leave them set at that. No-one will ever actually change 
> the values we 
> > supply, so I see no great reason to make the conf file any 
> bigger than 
> > it already is.
> Jules,
> Like some of the other SA settings (value for low/high spam) 
> the expire settings for low/high spam are very site specific. 
> As Raymond tried to explain: e-mail body's are analysed by 
> automated tools. This usually leadd to some url's being added 
> to a URIBL. 
> The URIBL will be updated once every couple of minutes. After 
> that -the same message body- would be tagged higher by SA 
> ..... I suppose the same is valid for bayes. If the same 
> message passes the filter more often, it should get a higher 
> bayes value.
> So, having a lower expire timeout on lowspam messages can be 
> 'required' for some setups. But other, who use less dynamic 
> SA lists probably could cope with a higher value ...


Something else you might consider implementing, is not to cache or cache
with a low timeout, the results when the message is auto-learned by
Since bayes has learned from the message, it will probably affect the
score of the next message, unless the score is already sufficiently high
enough or low enough for the spam result not be affected by a diffirent
bayes score.


------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the Wiki ( and
the archives (

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!

More information about the MailScanner mailing list