1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.USER

  • Re: *****SPAM***** Re: Spam from the list?

    From tomas@tuxteam.de@21:1/5 to Hans on Wed Mar 6 14:00:01 2024
    On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 01:53:49PM +0100, Hans wrote:
    Hi Brad,

    I am using this spamfilter now for several years. It should be well trained and
    almost until about 4 months I never had any problems with it.

    But until then suddenly the false positives increased from one day to another,
    although I had changed nothing.

    You keep saying that. Your mail provider seems to have changed something.
    Your spamassassin is seeing those new headers (which, by all comments in
    this thread are being added on the way from the mailing list to you)
    and acts accordingly.

    So nothing weird. Except, perhaps, your mail provider. There are few of
    them which are not weird these days.

    Cheers
    --
    t

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iF0EABECAB0WIQRp53liolZD6iXhAoIFyCz1etHaRgUCZehoogAKCRAFyCz1etHa Rh5gAJ99HzkpMH8yZMF9DgZjpZG7TIY27ACfX3Nms9X8oGLt7FYyWdcvS5f2Jio=
    =Il1Z
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Hans@21:1/5 to All on Wed Mar 6 14:00:01 2024
    Hi Brad,

    I am using this spamfilter now for several years. It should be well trained and
    almost until about 4 months I never had any problems with it.

    But until then suddenly the false positives increased from one day to another, although I had changed nothing.

    And weired: It happened only with mails from the debian forum! This looks weired for me. Other spammails are still well recognized and I get no false positives from any other site.

    Maybe this is by chance. But mails, which are recognized as spam are looking not fishy in any kind. Even a mail sent by myself to the forum was seen as spam.

    Of course there is the option, that my own spamfilter has changed, although I did nothing manually, it could not be excluded.

    I do not believe, it is is a training model, but of course, i will mark white mails as ham manually and see, if the false positives decrease.

    Will inform you again in a few days.

    Best

    Hans



    Am Mittwoch, 6. März 2024, 12:22:53 CET schrieb Brad Rogers:
    On Wed, 06 Mar 2024 11:19:27 +0100
    Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> wrote:

    Hello Hans,

    Does one see any reason, why this is considered as spam???

    Further to what Thomas says; You haven't told your spam filtering that
    it's ham. If you don't train your spam filters, it's never going to get
    any better at detecting what you consider to be ham/spam.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Nicolas George@21:1/5 to All on Wed Mar 6 14:50:02 2024
    Hans (12024-03-06):
    I am using this spamfilter now for several years. It should be well trained and
    almost until about 4 months I never had any problems with it.

    Hi.

    It is probably not the reason for you problem now, but it is important
    to note that in the “several years” since your spam filter was trained, spammers have not stayed idle, they have learned, they have refined
    their mail to bypass the most common protections. And in turn,
    protections have evolved to fight the new stealthiness of spammers.

    Spammers also have changed topics, they used to sell pills, now they
    sell cryptocurrencies. If your Bayesian filter is trained to recognize
    mails that sell pills, they might accept mails that seem to talk about technical points of computing.

    So if your own mail filter has not evolved, it is not surprising that it becomes progressively less efficient.

    Am Mittwoch, 6. März 2024, 12:22:53 CET schrieb Brad Rogers:

    Please remember not to top-post.

    Regards,

    --
    Nicolas George

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)