About:
SpamProbe is a spam detection program that uses a Bayesian analysis of the frequencies of terms used in the email. Because it filters email based on content rather than on general rules, it easily adapts itself to the types of email that each individual user normally receives.

Release focus: Minor bugfixes

Changes:
This release restores the -o suspicious-tags feature that had been accidentally removed in 1.2. It also fixes a text attachment parsing bug introduced in 1.3x1 (text attachments were effectively parsed dozens of times).

Author:
Brian Burton [contact developer]

Rating:	reset 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
8.56/10.00 (11 votes)

Homepage:
http://spamprobe.sourceforge.net/
Tar/GZ:
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/[..]pamprobe/spamprobe-1.3x4.tar.gz?download

Trove categories: [change]

[Development Status]		5 - Production/Stable
[Environment]		Console (Text Based)
[Intended Audience]		System Administrators
[License]		OSI Approved :: Q Public License (QPL)
[Operating System]		POSIX :: Linux
[Programming Language]		C++
[Topic]		Communications :: Email :: Filters

Dependencies: [change]
No dependencies filed

 Branches

Branch	Version	Last release	License	URLs
Default	1.4b	18-Feb-2006	Q Public License (QPL)
Experimental	1.3x4	20-Dec-2005	Q Public License (QPL)

 Releases

Version	Focus	Date
1.3x4	Minor bugfixes	20-Dec-2005 03:40
1.3x3	Major feature enhancements	16-Dec-2005 19:25
1.3x2	Minor feature enhancements	03-Dec-2005 04:17
1.1x4	Minor feature enhancements	13-Nov-2004 18:49
1.1x3	Code cleanup	11-Nov-2004 16:29
1.1x2	Code cleanup	08-Nov-2004 01:18

 Articles referencing this project

• Spam Filters
  by Sam Holden , in Category Reviews
  Sat, Aug 23rd 2003 00:00
  

 Comments

[»] Update from version 1.0a to 1.2a not useful
by tmstaedt - Dec 7th 2005 13:31:51

Hallo,

spamprobe 1.2a somehow blows it completely for me. Bad, bad results, while 1.0a was and is pretty good, albeit somewhat slow.

Regards,
Thomas Mittelstaedt
tmstaedt @ t-mittelstaedt . de

[reply] [top]

[»] Update from version 1.0a to 1.2a *very* useful
by tBB - Dec 8th 2005 01:35:24

Hi,

completely different experiences over here. At least when the PBL DB is used SpamProbe belongs to the fastest Bayesian classifiers. The accuracy in 1.2a is excellent as well. Even better in 1.3.x btw.

Regards, Nico

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Update from version 1.0a to 1.2a *very* useful
by tmstaedt - Dec 20th 2005 11:57:56

Nico,

Well, I made a mistake when building spamprobe. My database is Berkeley db and I somehow built it with that new hash feature enabled.
Here is the configure command, that built it correctly, I assume:

LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/lib CPPFLAGS=-I/usr/local/include/db3/ ./configure --enable-cdb --with-db=/usr/local/lib/

Regards,


> Hi,

> completely different experiences over

> here. At least when the PBL DB is used

> SpamProbe belongs to the fastest

> Bayesian classifiers. The accuracy in

> 1.2a is excellent as well. Even better

> in 1.3.x btw.

>

> Regards, Nico



[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Update from version 1.0a to 1.2a *very* useful, still blows it!!
by tmstaedt - Dec 20th 2005 12:04:43

Even with the correct build, when I run spamprobe find-good on my latest spam mails, I get totally miserable results compared to 1.0a! Strange! Do I have to retrain this new version with train-spam?




> Nico,

>

> Well, I made a mistake when building

> spamprobe. My database is Berkeley db

> and I somehow built it with that new

> hash feature enabled.

> Here is the configure command, that

> built it correctly, I assume:

>

> LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/lib

> CPPFLAGS=-I/usr/local/include/db3/

> ./configure --enable-cdb

> --with-db=/usr/local/lib/

>

> Regards,

>

>

> % Hi,

> % completely different experiences over

> % here. At least when the PBL DB is

> used

> % SpamProbe belongs to the fastest

> % Bayesian classifiers. The accuracy in

> % 1.2a is excellent as well. Even

> better

> % in 1.3.x btw.

> %

> % Regards, Nico

>

>

>



[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Update from version 1.0a to 1.2a *very* useful, still blows it!!
by Brian Burton - Dec 20th 2005 12:16:30


> Even with the correct build, when I run

> spamprobe find-good on my latest spam

> mails, I get totally miserable results

> compared to 1.0a! Strange! Do I have to

> retrain this new version with

> train-spam?

1.2 uses a different parser than 1.0 so there would be a benefit to updating your database using 1.2a to get the new terms found by the new parser. I don't know what "totally miserable" means to you but if you are saying that 1.2a isn't finding any spams then clearly there is a problem with your database. 1.2 is at least as accurate as 1.0 in all of my tests.

[reply] [top]

---