Spamassassin Correct ?

[Brian]

On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 08:10:48PM +1000, Michael Cohen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 06:58:44PM +0930, Garry Trethewey wrote:
> > Dunno if this is strictly linux stuff, but I'll reply to this list.
> > 
> > Loss via spam filters has become an issue for us. My wife & I work for 
> > state & local government. We've both lost stuff between work and home, 
> > and I've found (too late) I've lost quite important stuff from collegues.
> > 
> > I believe spam filters are often turned up to max sensitivity. Where I 
> > work, having porn is a sackable offence, so it's understandable.
> > 
> > Dunno what to do about it - I've tried the footer below, nobody takes 
> > any notice. Perhaps turn down the sensitivity, learn to tolerate a 
> > certain amount of garbage, but in the paranoid climate I just mentioned, 
> > that's not going to happen.
> > 
> > Im interested in any thoughts people have.
> > Garry
> 
> Garry,
>   I tend to use spam filters to just tag the mail as spam on the subject line.
>   It helps me quickly identify the spam email but there are a couple of cases
>   where emails have been mis-tagged. There are also lots of spam email which
>   are not getting tagged either (false positive and false negatives). 


Procmail is sending the mail labelled "spam" to trash. I should have
mailboxes =trash in muttrc so that I get notification of spam mail landing
in the box. Unfortunately mutt was not configured thus.

My question relates to the rules Spamassassin is using to detect spam. I am
not too sure what these mean.....except maybe (1)

eg

 1.6 DEAR_SOMETHING         BODY: Contains 'Dear (something)'
 2.5 URI_NO_WWW_BIZ_CGI     URI: CGI in .biz TLD other than third-level"www"
 1.2 BIZ_TLD                URI: Contains an URL in the BIZ top-level domain
-0.8 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list