spamassassin-users December 2011 archive
Main Archive Page > Month Archives  > spamassassin-users archives
spamassassin-users: Re: trusted-relay

Re: trusted-relay

From: Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uhlar_at_nospam>
Date: Wed Dec 21 2011 - 22:41:18 GMT

>On 12/21, wrote:
>> But your question may actually be a very good one, which might, in the
>> end, come down to: Why isn't RP_MATCHES_RCVD flagged as mutable and
>> having optimal scores generated based on masscheck data?

On 21.12.11 13:37, wrote:
>I take that back, I think all the scores in are mutable /
>subject to regular optimal re-scoring. So the answer is some combination
>1) Because you don't contribute data via masscheck, so we don't have the
> benefit of your data to improve the usefulness of scores.

should we contribute spam that hits RP_MATCHES_RCVD ? :)
(unluckily, not mentioning mailing lists, I'm not getting much of mail)

>2) Because the re-scorer thinks this rule is useful enough in blocking
> spams that it's worth the occasional missed spam it causes. Would you
> rather get as many spams as you do, and have them all hit
> RP_MATCHES_RCVD, or not use RP_MATCHES_RCVD, and miss twice as many
> spams? "Twice" is not intended to be a solid number, just an example of
> how the re-scorer might be thinking. Since it always aims for 1
> wrong non-spam in 2500, so what varies by rule usage is the number
> of spams it catches.

Actually, it has negative score, so the rule unblocks ham... and causes
-- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, ; Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. My mind is like a steel trap - rusty and illegal in 37 states.