Justin Mason <jm@jmason.org> writes:
> hmm. also I think I've found some cases where it's hitting on fetchmail
> Received hdrs.  that's bad.  so it could be fixed....
fetchmail adds Received headers?  That seems wrong.  I'll open a bug
to investigate.  Can you attach some examples?
> yeah, will do -- somehow.  pity the bugzilla doesn't allow email
> submissions...
Agreed.  At least you can add information with email.
- Dan

yyyy@example.com's message of "Tue, 17 Sep 2002 15:20:49 +0100"
No, hits=-8.9 required=7.0
	tests=AWL,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,
	      REFERENCES
	version=2.50-cvs

jm@jmason.org (Justin Mason) writes:
> Folks who've been hacking on the DNSBLs: would it be worthwhile commenting
> this in HEAD, seeing as it only gets .77 anyway?
>
> Sounds like the (a) broken server and (b) low hitrate combine to make it
> not-so-useful IMO.
No, in my opinion, it's purely a bug in SA (or the libraries we use,
which is the same thing) that we don't handle outages of network
services better.
The rule is useful and it does help reduce spam, we should keep it.  I
have a feeling the DNSBL rules will cluster a bit more heavily around
the 1.0 to 2.0 range once we start using the new GA on them.
Also, 0.77 was a slightly conservative number.  Since I didn't have
real-time data, I typically used the lower or median number of different
periods (most recent month, two months, six months), depending on the
trend of the period data (better performance for recent messages ->
favor recent scores, worse performance for recent messages -> favor
lowest scores, never pick the highest number unless the rule was very
accurate and the highest number was for the most recent data).
Dan

<yyyy@example.com>
yyyy@example.com
by example.com (Postfix, from userid 500)
	id 9B11716F1A; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 12:45:20 +0100 (IST)
from example.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8EBC1F7B1; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 12:45:20 +0100 (IST)
"Gary Funck" <gary@Intrepid.Com>
"Spamassassin List" <spamassassin-talk@example.sourceforge.net>,
	"Justin Mason" <jm@jmason.org>
Re: [SAtalk] checking out Razor2 (and SA 2.41) install - Net::DNS:Resolver problem?
Message from "Gary Funck" <gary@Intrepid.Com> 
   of "Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:36:05 PDT." <KNEFLOIOCHLFEGCDNFPHKEHPCFAA.gary@intrepid.com>
yyyy@example.com (Justin Mason)
0A48 2D8B 0B52 A87D 0E8A  6ADD 4137 1B50 6E58 EF0A
winter into spring
brightly anticipated
like Habeas SWE (tm)
Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm)
Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this
email in exchange for a license for this Habeas
warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant
Message (HCM) and not spam.  Please report use of this
mark in spam to <http://www.habeas.com/report/>.
Wed, 18 Sep 2002 12:45:15 +0100
yyyy@example.com
<20020918114520.9B11716F1A@example.com>
No, hits=-6.4 required=7.0
	tests=AWL,HABEAS_SWE,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT
	version=2.50-cvs
From jm@jmason.org  Wed Sep 18 12:45:20 2002