use Perl

• bogofilter (Score:1)

  by inkdroid (3294)

  Yeah, I think this highlights why bayesian analysis is better than rule based approaches. It's harder to tweak the message so it slips by. Also, it's my understanding that bogofilter can scaled much better on a high volume MTA than SpamAssasin...but I don't know this for a fact so perhaps I should keep quiet.
  • Re:bogofilter (Score:2)

    by Matts (1087)

    No it's true. SpamAssassin's rules are slow.
    
    On the flip side, bogofilter is a personal filter, so it's not going to perform that well on larger installations, which kind of breaks the point of being so much faster, doesn't it?
    • Re:bogofilter (Score:1)

      by inkdroid (3294)

      bogofilter can be run from procmail or invoked by your mta just like spamassasin. It just needs a nice corpus of spam/non-spam. What do you mean by being a "personal filter"?
      • Re:bogofilter (Score:2)

        by Matts (1087)

        Bayesian filters are personalised. They learn your ham/spam types. If you add in John-From-Marketing's ham then it massively decreases the effectiveness of the filter (because of the lists he subscribes to) for you. They don't stop working, but they're not as effective as SpamAssassin at large installations.
        
        See my talk on this at the spam conference.
        • Re:bogofilter (Score:1)

          by inkdroid (3294)

          URL?
          • Re:bogofilter (Score:3, Informative)

            by Matts (1087) on 2003.02.04 17:14 (#16713) Journal

            http://axkit.org/docs/presentations/spam/ [axkit.org]

            Reply to This

            Parent