Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: How to "untrain" spam detection

  1. #1
    eintel is offline Partner (VAR/HSP)
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    12
    Rep Power
    8

    Default How to "untrain" spam detection

    Hi,
    We have some users that have a particular email being marked as spam as follows;

    X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
    X-Spam-Flag: YES
    X-Spam-Score: 7.052
    X-Spam-Level: *******
    X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=7.052 tagged_above=-10 required=6.6
    tests=[AWL=-1.673, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
    RCVD_IN_DSBL=2.6, RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL=1.946, RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY=0.721,
    RCVD_IN_SORBS_SOCKS=2.159, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.897]

    How do a "untrain" the spam fucntionality in zimbra so that the rules causing this particular message to be marked as spam.

    The users claim that they have never marked and emails from the address as spam.

    Looking forward to your advice.

    Regards
    Ben

  2. #2
    phoenix is online now Zimbra Consultant & Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Vannes, France
    Posts
    23,497
    Rep Power
    56

    Default

    Is the spam ending up in the Junk folder? If it is then just hit the 'Not Junk' button. You can also run zmtrainsa manually against the users mailbox as 'ham', zmtrainsa from the command line will give you the format.
    Regards


    Bill


    Acompli: A new adventure for Co-Founder KevinH.

  3. #3
    chh
    chh is offline Advanced Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    196
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Training SA won't help here.
    The mail is not categorized as spam by the Bayes filter:
    BAYES_00=-2.599

    Your problem is the tested blacklists:
    RCVD_IN_DSBL=2.6, RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL=1.946, RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY=0.721,
    RCVD_IN_SORBS_SOCKS=2.159, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.897

    Solutions:
    - raise the needed points for being reconginzed as spam from 6.6 to 7.x
    - raise the negative value of BAYES_00 to smoething like -4
    - check why all the blacklist filters apply and solve that problem

    The third one is probably the one making most sense in the long run.

    Christian

  4. #4
    scottnelson is offline Special Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Agreed.


    Also,
    1. Did the default 75/33 get modifed?
    2. Is this happening for a lot of incoming e-mail or just one?

    Scotty

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Trying to understand Zimbra's anti-spam system
    By TaskMaster in forum Users
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-25-2008, 09:59 AM
  2. [SOLVED] Reject SPAM
    By s0undt3ch in forum Users
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-22-2007, 03:07 AM
  3. Spam being scored with BAYES_00
    By flyerguybham in forum Administrators
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-24-2007, 12:07 PM
  4. How to check if spam training is working?
    By tbovingdon in forum Administrators
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-13-2007, 05:57 AM
  5. Training spam and ham
    By Justin in forum Developers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-31-2006, 03:39 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •