From: Tony G. <to...@of...> - 2007-05-27 21:12:55
|
In my tests, I found that running through spamassassin (with razor tests) and keeping its headers did better than giving crm114 the raw headers since spamassasin generalized the whole open-relay-identification issue. But haven't done the same test with recent classifiers On 5/24/07, Paolo <oo...@us...> wrote: > On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 01:53:48AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > > |formail -kxFrom: -xSubject: | crm ??? > ... > > This got me thinking: do headers contain valuable information for > > yes > > > Would it not make sense to simply crop all headers other than > > Subject and then to train and classify based on the subject and body > > depends on your stuff: if you want to classify your mail, other than > spam/good, you *may* want to keep just to: cc: subject: and body, > since you're mostly interested in the actual body contents. > > But for spam/good extensive tests have shown that headers play a big role, > though how useful such role is, depends on classifier (eg ifile(1) didn't > like them). > I'm used to trash all ID headers and zero date fields though, as that's > pure noise. > > See attached awk script to get an(other) idea to play with. > (you may want to (try to) re-implement it in crm as an exercise ;) > if so pls post back :) ) > > > > -- > paolo > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express > Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take > control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ > _______________________________________________ > Crm114-discuss mailing list > Crm...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/crm114-discuss > > > -- -- Tony Godshall g |