https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6724
--- Comment #12 from Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> 2011-12-13 17:56:48 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > score URIBL_BLACK_BLOCKED 0.001 > score URIBL_GREY_BLOCKED 0.001 > score URIBL_RED_BLOCK 0.001 > > Wouldn't URIBL_BLACK / URIBL_GREY / URIBL_RED also hit, whenever those hit, > due > to them being urirhssub rules with "a single decimal or hex" value, so it's > checking for a bit mask, not equality? > So we'd need scores that negate the scores of the URIBL rules? > > score URIBL_BLACK_BLOCKED 0 -1.775 0 -1.725 > score URIBL_GREY_BLOCKED 0 -1.084 0 -0.424 > score URIBL_RED_BLOCKED -0.001 Hmm, isn't 255 a bitmask of all the other bits? We need a response such as 16 or 32 or something that is a single bit. That way we can fire ONLY the block rule otherwise we aren't meeting the parameters of Solution 2. The response from the RBL cannot fire off other rules as it is untenable to try and maintain opposite abs scores. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
