Just a thought. We would have to test it but do you think the same thing could be achieved using:
IPREPUTATION-3 SNFIPREP x -3 0 -5 IPREPUTATION-2 SNFIPREP x -2 0 -5 IPREPUTATION-1 SNFIPREP x -1 0 -5 IPREPUTATION-0 SNFIPREP x 0 5 -5 IPREPUTATION+1 SNFIPREP x 1 5 -5 IPREPUTATION+2 SNFIPREP x 2 5 -5 IPREPUTATION+3 SNFIPREP x 3 5 -5 This way the further an IP is on the scale the greater the credit or additional score. This would have to wait till we implement the - negative for the BASEPOINT. David From: supp...@declude.com [mailto:supp...@declude.com] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 4:52 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Sniffer IP Reputation -- Graduated Weight Scheme Hi Dave, I'm breaking this into two discussions as they are two different topics. The REAL point of Pete's input (and my suggestion) for SNFIPREP is that the reputation scale of -1 through +1 should NOT just result in either ONE positive or ONE negative weight option. Your example: IPREPUTATION SNFIPREP x 0 10 -5 only result in either a "10" being added or a "5" being subtracted. So you are turning a continuous scale of -1 to +1 into two discrete values - losing all the key benefits of having the reputation scale in the first place. You already have the SNFIP return codes, if someone wanted a "fix" value for a particular "level" of reputation. To really make use of the GBUdb, there should be a continuous weight from 0 to 10 for "bad" reputation and 0 through -5 for "good" reputation (using your sample of 10 and -5). Basically, for positive GBUdb values, multiply with the "10" (getting a value from 0 to 10 depending on "how bad" the reputation is), for negative values multiply with "-5" to get a weight from 0 to -5 (depending on "how good" the IP is). This would make the test really useful because it would only cause BIG weight changes for BIG GBUdb values. Best Regards, Andy From: supp...@declude.com [mailto:supp...@declude.com] On Behalf Of David Barker Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 3:40 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Sniffer IP Reputation for "white" listing As Pete already provided input on this. I am not going to prolix the answer other than to say when implementing Message Sniffer we abided by the Pete's advice "Since many legitimate ISPs also produce a lot of spam it might be useful to apply a bias to this weight so that these systems appear closer to zero." So currently we do not allow for a negative value as a BASEPOINT, with that said if you think it is really important to be able to use a negative value as you have described in your post, let me know and I can add it to the dev list. David Barker VP Operations Declude Your Email security is our business 978.499.2933 office 978.988.1311 fax <mailto:dbar...@declude.com> dbar...@declude.com --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
