Re: Spamassassin slows things down like mad!

[Paul Jakma <paul dishone st>]

On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, Patrick wrote:

> but I haven't seen anything surface. Imho at the end of the day you 
> are far better of with postfix with some good rules which will stop 
> a ton of spam attempts and then add a drop of dspam to kill the

'spamprobe' is also really good. A standalone bayesian filter. See:

	http://spamprobe.sf.net

IMHO, Bayesian filtering is far more effective at catching spam than 
static rules (SA uses both). Also, I run 'rbl-milter' to add 
X-RBL-Milter headers based on DNSBls and I have spamprobe configured 
to consider these headers. Which is rather better than configuring 
your MTA to reject DNSBl'd mail, cause you don't have to worry about 
effectiveness of a DNSBl, particularly overbearing ones - instead 
spamprobe will 'learn' how effective different DNSBl's are for you.

regards,
--
Paul Jakma	paul clubi ie	paul jakma org	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it's still a foolish thing.
		-- Bertrand Russell