|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > spamassassin-dev archives|
--- Comment #27 from Warren Togami <firstname.lastname@example.org> 2011-12-12 19:41:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> (In reply to comment #25)
> > Should these rules be put in a sandbox so they continue to be monitored? They
> > could also be left enabled with informational scores so reuse could be used,
> > but I doubt that would be worthwhile.
> I believe the rules have been in a sandbox since 3.3.0. I am correct, they are
> in Theo's sandbox which is where they have been living for a while.
> As of 3.3.0, I believe, we were publishing hand-generated scores that are
> higher than masscheck auto-determined.
We were publishing hand-generated scores for DNSWL long before 3.3.0.
I lead the charge to manually reduce these hard-coded scores prior to 3.3.0 due
to this issue. Subsequently I went even further to suggest that we should
reduce DNSWL and IADB scores even further as they don't seem to have automatic
means of enforcement in place and we see consistent FP's in our tests. More
recently I suggested that we should set all whitelists to -0.01 informational
during GA scoring as they have nothing to do with the performance of positive
scoring rules and thus can improperly throw off the scoring.
> Overall, the efficacy of DNSWL outside of the FP scores is well established
> and that's not a barrier to the re-enabling of the scores.
Well established based on what? Has anyone looked at the statistics to prove
that this situation has not changed?
-- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.