Mailing List Archive: Did someone miss an = ?

Did someone miss an = ?

Mar 8, 2004, 1:44 PM

Post #1 of 6 (693 views)

This spam got a hit of 5.0 with a required of 5.0, but was not marked
as spam - did someone forgot an "=" and just said ">" ?

Steve

Return-Path: <edirani@webmailv.com>
Received: from host-54.104.49.200-ta.adsl.netizen.com.ar (host-54.104.49.200-ta.adsl.netizen.com.ar
[200.49.104.54])
by geekster.com (8.12.1/8.12.1) with SMTP id i28KQtt9026520
for <sprior@geekster.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 15:27:18 -0500
Received: from 31.106.64.184 by web321.mail.yahoo.com; Tue, 09 Mar 2004 13:20:13 +0200
Message-ID: <WKCOXDVYRKJPVDCBQKXBBW@yahoo.com>
From: "Weston Denny" <edirani@webmailv.com>
To: sprior@geekster.com
Subject: john holmes ..... YOU
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 09:24:13 -0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="--52452013607859433"
X-CS-IP: 70.201.40.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on tux.geekster.com
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.0 required=5.0 tests=BLANK_LINES_70_80,
BigEvilList_24,NO_DNS_FOR_FROM autolearn=no version=2.63
X-Spam-Level: ****

----52452013607859433
Content-Type: text/plain;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

Really LAY some PIPE to the next girl you bang...

http://sandra.ffdsd4d.com/vp5

Re: Did someone miss an = ? [ In reply to ]

mkettler at evi-inc

Mar 8, 2004, 1:57 PM

Post #2 of 6 (673 views)

Permalink

At 03:44 PM 3/8/2004, Steve Prior wrote:
>This spam got a hit of 5.0 with a required of 5.0, but was not marked
>as spam - did someone forgot an "=" and just said ">" ?

No, it's rounding... 4.999 rounds to 5.0, but is less than 5.0... read the
FAQ that's in the wiki.

Re: Did someone miss an = ? [ In reply to ]

eccles at mira

Mar 8, 2004, 1:58 PM

Post #3 of 6 (676 views)

Permalink

On Mon, 08 Mar 2004 15:44:59 -0500, Steve Prior wrote:

>This spam got a hit of 5.0 with a required of 5.0, but was not marked
>as spam - did someone forgot an "=" and just said ">" ?

If you look up the scores for BLANK_LINES_70_80, BigEvilList_24 and
NO_DNS_FOR_FROM, you'll find they total 4.972, which is rounded up to
5.0 in the X-Spam-Status report but is below the 5.0 required to be
classified as spam.

Re: Did someone miss an = ? [ In reply to ]

jdow at earthlink

Mar 8, 2004, 4:22 PM

Post #4 of 6 (677 views)

Permalink

From: "Steve Prior" <sprior@geekster.com>

> This spam got a hit of 5.0 with a required of 5.0, but was not marked
> as spam - did someone forgot an "=" and just said ">" ?
>
> Steve
...
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.0 required=5.0 tests=BLANK_LINES_70_80,
> BigEvilList_24,NO_DNS_FOR_FROM autolearn=no version=2.63
> X-Spam-Level: ****

Roundoff will do that.
{^_^}

RE: Did someone miss an = ? [ In reply to ]

Matthew.van.Eerde at hbinc

Mar 8, 2004, 4:28 PM

Post #5 of 6 (675 views)

Permalink

> From: Steve Prior [mailto:sprior@geekster.com]
>
> This spam got a hit of 5.0 with a required of 5.0, but was not marked
> as spam - did someone forgot an "=" and just said ">" ?
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.0 required=5.0 ...

This is a UAQ (Ubiquitously Asked Question)
The short answer is, the hits was probably something like 4.98
The comparison to determine spam-status is done at full accuracy - 4.98 <
5.0
However, the X-Spam-Status header is built using the rounded versions - 4.98
rounds to 5.0 rather than 4.9

Since this question is so frequently asked, I suggest changing the way the
X-Spam-Status header is built to round *down* for "hits" - so even a 4.9999
will round down to 4.9. That is, instead of using $hits, use ($hits - 0.05)

Matthew van Eerde
Software Engineer
Hispanic Business Inc.
HireDiversity.com
805.964.4554 x902
Matthew.van.Eerde@hbinc.com
http://www.hispanicbusiness.com
http://www.hirediversity.com

Re: Did someone miss an = ? [ In reply to ]

duncf at debian

Mar 8, 2004, 4:35 PM

Post #6 of 6 (676 views)

Permalink

On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 03:28:21PM -0800, Matthew.van.Eerde@hbinc.com wrote:
> > From: Steve Prior [mailto:sprior@geekster.com]
> >
> > This spam got a hit of 5.0 with a required of 5.0, but was not marked
> > as spam - did someone forgot an "=" and just said ">" ?
> > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.0 required=5.0 ...
>
> This is a UAQ (Ubiquitously Asked Question)
> The short answer is, the hits was probably something like 4.98
> The comparison to determine spam-status is done at full accuracy - 4.98 <
> 5.0
> However, the X-Spam-Status header is built using the rounded versions - 4.98
> rounds to 5.0 rather than 4.9
>
> Since this question is so frequently asked, I suggest changing the way the
> X-Spam-Status header is built to round *down* for "hits" - so even a 4.9999
> will round down to 4.9. That is, instead of using $hits, use ($hits - 0.05)

It's fixed in SVN (although your way is not what we want...)

--
Duncan Findlay

Mailing List Archive

Mailing List Archive

Attached Files: