On 5/10/2024 2:57 AM, Thomas Barth wrote:
Am 2024-05-10 06:19, schrieb Reindl Harald (privat):
Am 10.05.24 um 00:05 schrieb Thomas Barth:
Am 2024-05-09 21:41, schrieb Loren Wilton:
Low-score tests are neither spam nor ham signs by themselves. They
can be used in metas in conjunction with
On 2024-05-10 at 14:15:56 UTC-0400 (Fri, 10 May 2024 14:15:56 -0400)
Bill Cole
is rumored to have said:
> On 2024-05-09 at 18:19:14 UTC-0400 (Thu, 9 May 2024 15:19:14 -0700)
> jdow
> is rumored to have said:
>
>> On 20240509 15:05:46, Thomas Barth wrote:
>>> Am 2024-05-09 21:41, schrieb Loren
oh dear, when do he stop ?
Original besked
Emne: Re: Rule: "1.0 R_DCD 90% of .com. is spam"
Dato: 2024-05-10 20:17
Afsender: "Reindl Harald (gmail)"
Modtager: Benny Pedersen
Am 10.05.24 um 20:14 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas skrev den 2024-05-10 18:46:
On
On 2024-05-10 at 11:00:45 UTC-0400 (Fri, 10 May 2024 08:00:45 -0700 (PDT))
John Hardin
is rumored to have said:
> Note that poorly-performing rules may get a score that looks informational,
> but that may change over time based on the corpora.
IOW: rules that in themselves are not good enough
On 2024-05-09 at 18:19:14 UTC-0400 (Thu, 9 May 2024 15:19:14 -0700)
jdow
is rumored to have said:
> On 20240509 15:05:46, Thomas Barth wrote:
>> Am 2024-05-09 21:41, schrieb Loren Wilton:
>>> Low-score tests are neither spam nor ham signs by themselves. They can be
>>> used in metas in
Matus UHLAR - fantomas skrev den 2024-05-10 18:46:
On 10.05.24 15:36, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
The ikea mail was received through ...
mta-numbers.ikea.com.sparkpostmail.com and is a request for feedback.
The SA rule says ...
header R_DCD Received =~ /\.com\./
I still do not know where the
On 2024-05-10 at 11:08:53 UTC-0400 (Fri, 10 May 2024 15:08:53 +)
Rupert Gallagher
is rumored to have said:
> R_DCD
That string does not occur anywhere in the SpamAssassin distribution, neither
in the code nor in the rules, *including* the rules that are not currently
performing well
On 2024-05-09 at 17:21:07 UTC-0400 (Fri, 10 May 2024 07:21:07 +1000)
Noel Butler
is rumored to have said:
> So what? domain owners state hard fail it SHOULD be hard failed, irrespective
> of if YOU think you know better than THEM or not, if we hardfail we accept
> the risks that come with it.
On 10.05.24 15:36, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
The ikea mail was received through ... mta-numbers.ikea.com.sparkpostmail.com
and is a request for feedback.
The SA rule says ...
header R_DCD Received =~ /\.com\./
I still do not know where the rule comes from, DCD may actually mean
dot-com-dot,
Ahhh
The ikea mail was received through ... mta-numbers.ikea.com.sparkpostmail.com
and is a request for feedback.
The SA rule says ...
header R_DCD Received =~ /\.com\./
I still do not know where the rule comes from, DCD may actually mean
dot-com-dot, and perhaps it is true that they are
I only have stock and KAM, and it is definitely not a custom rule of mine.
Original Message
On May 10, 2024, 17:11, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 10.05.24 15:08, Rupert Gallagher wrote: >My local evidence does not
> support the general claim that 90% of .com is spam. > >I
On 10.05.24 15:08, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
My local evidence does not support the general claim that 90% of .com is spam.
I just received a mail from informat...@info.email.ikea.com marked as spam,
with positive R_DCD. The rule did not trigger on mail from other .com addresses.
I do not know
My local evidence does not support the general claim that 90% of .com is spam.
I just received a mail from informat...@info.email.ikea.com marked as spam,
with positive R_DCD. The rule did not trigger on mail from other .com addresses.
I do not know what R_DCD means, and search indexes do not
On Fri, 10 May 2024, Thomas Barth wrote:
So now I repeat my question: is it possible to increase the minimum
value to 0.1 by default?
Not really.
The score for a rule is either a fixed value assigned by the rule
developer or a dynamic value calculated by masscheck nightly. There isn't
a
On 20240509 23:57:12, Thomas Barth wrote:
Am 2024-05-10 06:19, schrieb Reindl Harald (privat):
Am 10.05.24 um 00:05 schrieb Thomas Barth:
Am 2024-05-09 21:41, schrieb Loren Wilton:
Low-score tests are neither spam nor ham signs by themselves. They can be
used in metas in conjunction with
On 09.05.24 20:41, Thomas Barth wrote:
I don't understand why there are so many checks where the meaningless
value of 0.001 is assigned.
Those rules may be tested in the present.
They also may be informative, e.g. DMARC_MISSING or SPF_PASS
rules with score 0 are not used so using 0 is not
Am 2024-05-10 06:19, schrieb Reindl Harald (privat):
Am 10.05.24 um 00:05 schrieb Thomas Barth:
Am 2024-05-09 21:41, schrieb Loren Wilton:
Low-score tests are neither spam nor ham signs by themselves. They
can be used in metas in conjunction with other indicators to help
determine ham or
17 matches
Mail list logo
