[Spambayes] SpamBayes not catching spam in mail sorted by InboxRules?

Dennis McCunney dmccunney at nyc.rr.com
Thu Jun 3 20:26:16 EDT 2004


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Peters [mailto:tim.one at comcast.net]
> Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 7:43 PM
> To: dmccunney at nyc.rr.com; 'SpamBayes Mailing List (E-mail)'
> Subject: RE: [Spambayes] SpamBayes not catching spam in mail sorted by
> InboxRules?
>
> [Dennis McCunney]
> > ...
> > When does SpamBayes actually look at the mail to classify
> > it?  A couple of lists I'm on are prone to spam, and the spam
> > seems to get through.  It *looks* like the Inbox rule is putting
> > the mail in the list folder *before* SpamBayes has a chance to
> > detect that it's spam and move it to the Junk folder.
>
> That's usually true.  SpamBayes scores a piece of email when
> Outlook decides to tell SpamBayes that new email has arrived, and,
> unfortunately, it may do that before running its own rules, after
> running them, both before and after, or not at all.  Tell it to
> Microsoft <wink>.

Why am I unsurprised?  The only things I'd tell Microsoft these days would
be the sort of stuff not printable in a family publication.

> It's most likely that Outlook will run its own rules first, and
> you can make that *extremely* likely by enabling the SpamBayes
> "background filtering" option.  It doesn't appear possible to
> convince Outlook to run Spambayes first, at least not with our c
> urrent approach (or with any other realistic approach investigated
> to date).

Again, I am unsurprised.

> Note that you can tell SpamBayes to watch any number of folders,
> not just the Inbox.  That's how I filter spam from the folders my
> Rules move things into.

Now that I know that's the work-around, it's what I'll probably do.

Out of curiousity, would installing SpamBayes as a proxy the way it would be
set up for Outlook Express instead of as a plugin to Outlook address this?
For that matter, can it be installed *both* ways on the same machine?  I use
Outlook for email, but my other half doesn't.  She gets little spam, so this
is a "future refrence" sort of thing.

> Someone recently reported horrible problems when trying that with
> (hard to say) about 1,000 different folders, spread across
> multiple .pst files, but nobody has reported problems with
> non-extreme use.

I have about 125 folders, and *one* PST file.  Granted, the PST file is over
a gigabyte. (And that's after a massive purge.  Outlook arppears to have
issues when the mailbox.pst file grows over 2GB...)

> > I could be wrong about that (and probably am),
>
> Nope!  Sometimes appearances aren't deceiving <wink>.
>
> > but I am curious.  A quick glance at the FAQ didn't reveal an
> > answer. Apologies if it was there and I just didn't see it: I'm
> > one of those folks who *does* RTFM. :)
>
> That's appreciated.  Want to be one of those folks who WTFM?
> I think we could benefit by explaining what's known about the
> excruciating interactions between SB and Rules in a comprehensible way.

Once *I* understand it, and if I have time, I'd be happy to.  I don't know
about the first, but the second won't happen any time soon.
______
Dennis





More information about the Spambayes mailing list