View Single Post
Old 29 Oct 2018, 08:24 PM   #8
xyzzy
Essential Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 474
Quote:
Originally Posted by n5bb View Post
You can search for all such existing messages with this search:
Code:
header:"X-Spam-source: Host='noreverse"
A warning: Header searches can be slow on large mailboxes.
Heh, the deeper I dig into FM or from reading posts in this forum I keep finding additional features of FM I didn't even know existed nor to ask about. This is one such case. I didn't even know you could do searches like that! Just looked a the FM search doc. Cool. Thanks for the example.

Quote:
My main Fastmail account is over 14 years old and I have over 11 GB of accumulated mail, so it’s very slow. I found about 970 noreverse messages which were no spam (most from common senders I trust), and looked at the full headers. So that’s less that’s 1% of my non-spam received.
I'm mainly using FM through Thunderbird (POP with delete from server) so there really isn't an "real" email saved in the webmail except stuff that doesn't make it to the inbox. Still have to check the webmail spam though which is what started this exercise of making the filters trying to reduce the spam in the first place (although it's not out of hand anyhow).

Quote:
After using a reverse IP lookup tool, I believe that most or all of the noreverse I received from non-spammers were transient failures for Fastmail to quickly discover a reverse IP. So as you are doing, I would combine this with a high spam score before using this to block messages.
The reason I jumped on "noreverse" as a possibility is that 100% of the stuff I've gotten in the short time I've been using it was indeed spam. But based on the opinions here I think I will abandon the noreverse and try other criteria (email contents, substrings in titles, etc.). For the moment though I am keeping the noreverse test in just to sort those email into their own mailbox.

Quote:
If you have reported at least 200 messages as spam and 200 as non-spam
Yeah, the spam filters are just going up their "learning curve". I've only had FM since July and only recently passed 200. All in all I haven't had to correct the filters too much which is why I am only just passing 200 now.

Quote:
After years of experience, I decided to use custom settings and set my move-to-spam-folder threshold to 1.8 and spam discard threshold to 9.0.
It will take me a while for me to get a feel for the spam values and what's best for me. I did include the setting to put the spam number in the subject line to make it easier to see.

Quote:
I also use address book whitelisting, which makes it very hard for messages from known senders to end up in my spam folder.
Yes, I do that too. Very hard? If they are in the contacts how could they be placed in the spam box in the first place? The sieve code tests X-Spam-Known-Sender before it even gets a chance to sort into the spam box. Are there cases where FM doesn't insert a X-Spam-Known-Sender header?

Quote:
If you discard messages from the spam folder they are marked as spam, so be sure to mark any ham in the spam folder as non-spam if they are desired and they will move to your Inbox.
I realize marking as not spam is what training the spam filters (or making stuff not in the spam box as spam). But it's not been clear to me about marking the spam that's already in the spam box when you empty it. The stuff was given a spam score and that's what got it filtered into the spam box in the first place. So when I empty the spam box (or it gets auto emptied) why would that "mark" them as spam again? Or is that just training my own local spam filters at that point?
xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote