[Evolution] Spamassassin, Junk/Not-Junk, Training

[Not Zed]

You can do this already, simply set-up a filter where you filter on the
x-spam* header, as appropriate.

The junk/not junk will run through the sa-learn stuff, it doesn't
actually move the mail anywhere, the junk folder is only a vfolder.

If you already have the subject altered, you can similarly just mark the
mail as junk in a filter.


On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 12:32 -0500, Rick DeNatale wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 23:04 -0500, aaron at ximian.com wrote:
> > Well, I've got to put all that lot into the docs, but here's a quick summary:
> > 
> > * Spamassassin only. Want another system? Pipe to shell script (Now "Run
> > Command").
> 
> For those of us who have already been using SpamAssassin, and have users
> who use other Mail Clients, it would be really nice if Evo would support
> a mode of using SA in which the mail has already been filtered and
> tagged with SA.  While the integration of MTA/MDA functions into the
> client is attractive to some folks in certain situations, allowing
> things to work in a more loosely coupled manner would also be useful.
> 
> Right now I use a vfolder to filter for [SPAM] in the subject. I handle
> ham and uncaught spam by having local folders called "Surviving Spam"
> and "Ham" and moving e-mail to those folders. I then have a shell script
> which I run periodically which uses sa-learn to train on these mailboxes
> and in the case of ham formail and  spamassassin -d to get the mail back
> into it's "original" form and put it in a local mailbox called processed
> ham.
> 
> I'd like to be able to use the junk and not-junk buttons to do this.
> 
> I'm assuming that junk uses sa-learn to train sa that the mail is spam,
> and then moves it to junk, and that not-junk trains it as ham, get's it
> back in it's original form and then moves it back to the inbox.
> 
> I'm not sure what filter junk does.
> 
> If Evo could be told to just look at the subject for the [SPAM] tag,
> perhaps with a way to override the actual tag and send those to the junk
> folder, then the other functions (junk/not junk) would just work.  It
> might take a little more to work with site-wide filtering, but I'm not
> currently using that.
> 
> If I have a filter which looks for the tag, and sets the status to junk,
> should this work?
> 
> 
> > 
> > * The "Local tests only" will check your bayesian methods and known
> > suspiciousness tests, but won't use the online blackhole lists and so
> > forth.
> > 
> > * For enhanced performance, start the daemon (as root) and select "Use
> > Daemon."
> > 
> > * Server side spam filtering is almost always better. Local spam filtering
> > means you have to download it and then filter and then discard.
> > Server-side means it happens before you get there, so you don't have to
> > wait for filtration to happen. Although server-side is harder to train...
> > (not integrated into Evo in any way).
> > 
> 
> And that's what I'd like to see a little better integration with server
> side filtering.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> evolution maillist  -  evolution at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution