https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6529
Summary: Evaluate NiX Spam DNSBL
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.3.1
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows 7
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Rules
AssignedTo: [email protected]
ReportedBy: [email protected]
20_khop_bl.cf since late 2009 contained the rule RCVD_IN_NIX_SPAM
http://blog.malowa.de/2010/12/nix-spam-is-fairly-good-dnsbl.html
According to this blog post, NIX_SPAM lists IP's for only 12 hours. I have
confirmed in my own local masschecks that NIX_SPAM is very good only for spam
received during that window, and otherwise testing older spam is a big waste of
time and resources as it will not tell you anything useful.
Perhaps we should treat this a bit differently from evaluating other DNSBL's in
the weekly masscheck because it is useless to test the vast majority of spam.
Proposal
========
1) Add "reuse" to its tflags, which would exclude it from normal querying
during the masscheck if masscheck clients had used --reuse. Excluded testing
and resulting false negatives is *OK* because results older than 12 hours would
be unreliable anyway.
2) All sources of mail heading into the corpus from now on should do tagging
with spamassassin using these rules in local.cf:
header RCVD_IN_NIX_SPAM
eval:check_rbl('nix-spam-lastexternal','ix.dnsbl.manitu.net.')
describe RCVD_IN_NIX_SPAM Received via a relay in NiX Spam (heise.de)
score RCVD_IN_NIX_SPAM 0.01
3) Perceived performance in RuleQA will appear to be very poor because of all
the majority of mail from pre-tagging. But we can instead look at the most
recent week performance to see how this rule is doing.
Thoughts?
--
Configure bugmail:
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
