[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-17 19:26 --- Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs. On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 07:19:04PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMO invisible or unclickable URIs should have the lowest priority for checking. Spammers probably won't dilute their target URI by making other ones visible. Therefore the invisible or unclickable ones are probably chaff and safely ignored. This is a (social) function of more effective advertising. This should really be discussed in a new ticket or on dev, since the issue is unrelated to this ticket. I think we all agree on your statements though. :) --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-17 20:03 --- I have opened up the following ticket and copied Jeff's comment to the description: Bug 3976 [RFE] Invisible URIs should tend to be ignored --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 12:05 --- +1 . I was wondering what Sidney was talking about ;) --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 12:23 --- committed. r56149 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 19:25 --- Correction -- I forgot that I had not run make test since applying and trying out the patch. This is from nmake test under Win32: t\basic_lintplugin: eval failed: Can't locate object method han dle_parser_error via package Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL at ..\lib/M ail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/URIDNSBL.pm line 275. config: failed to parse line, skipping: uridnsbl_timeout2 lint: 1 issues detected. please rerun with debug enabled for more information. I retract that +1 until I see what is going on. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 20:35 --- Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs. On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 07:34:25PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, -1 on the patches. Umm... No disrespect intended, but the patches as posted don't include that call (which is a new plugin hack I've been putting in the plugins for 3.1 so error handling occurs correctly). The patches as posted in the ticket pass make test, although the first one doesn't apply cleanly for some reason. I'll post a new version which goes against the current stable branch. I found the 3.1 make test failures right as I was reading your post, btw... That'll be fixed shortly. :) --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #2494 is|0 |1 obsolete|| Attachment #2497 is|0 |1 obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 20:36 --- Created an attachment (id=2498) -- (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2498action=view) new version, applies cleanly --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-30 03:02 --- Sorry for not noticing thatthe make test faiolure was not the resuolt of the patch. Tested the new patch in trunk and 3.0.2 branch. +1 for the new patch --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 17:30 --- Am I correct in understanding that the default value for uridnsbl_max_domains is 20? Given how well (for most people) we have been doing with no limit, should the default be larger? --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 09:10 --- I applied the patch to URIDNSBL in my 3.0.1 install and it now honors the default uridnsbl_max_domains of 20, but does not allow me to override that setting in my local.cf. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 09:14 --- Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs. On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 09:10:23AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I applied the patch to URIDNSBL in my 3.0.1 install and it now honors the default uridnsbl_max_domains of 20, but does not allow me to override that setting in my local.cf. Heh. Look at that. There's no parse_config() option for it. Ok, I'll put up a second patch for that in a little bit... At least we're halfway there. ;) --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dev@spamassassin.apache.org AssignedTo|dev@spamassassin.apache.org |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Summary|URIDNSBL plugin does not|[review] URIDNSBL plugin |honor config option to limit|does not honor config option |URLs. |to limit URLs. --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:36 --- changing to review state. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:42 --- This might also cause our FP rate to go down slightly, in any case I'm glad it was trivial! --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:45 --- Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs. On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 02:42:49PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This might also cause our FP rate to go down slightly, in any case I'm glad it was trivial! I think it's more likely to cause the FN rate to go up. A trivial way around is to put in enough non-spam URIs such that the likelihood is that your spam URI won't be listed. Perhaps we'll need a rule to look for too many URIs in a message. G --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:45 --- Will this avoid the crash in bug 3924 ? If it reduces the number of sockets that are produced to less than the over 350 that the test case there generates, I would say so, but I'm where I can't test anything for some hours. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:50 --- Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs. On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 02:45:27PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Will this avoid the crash in bug 3924 ? in theory. I committed the patch to 3.1 already, so if it was reproducable there, update your WC and try it again. :) If it reduces the number of sockets that are produced to less than the over 350 that the test case there generates, I would say so, but I'm where I can't test anything for some hours. I don't have a Windows box to test on, so I can't say at all. If the plugin takes 20 domains and turns it into 350+ sockets, there's a problem... Even 120 domains (or whatever the number was) shouldn't get to 350 IMO. It should be roughly N + X, where X is a small integer for overhead. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 15:04 --- Correction, 5 times, not 4 times, but only 1 for each URI with a numeric ip address. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Re: [Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
I think it's more likely to cause the FN rate to go up. A trivial way around is to put in enough non-spam URIs such that the likelihood is that your spam URI won't be listed. I think a good work-around and improvement would be to change the randomization function to favor certain URLs: - earlier == higher probability - visible == higher probability - clickable == higher probability But, keep it random and allow even late/invisible/unclickable to be queried so we can't be completely fooled by some HTML trick. Perhaps we'll need a rule to look for too many URIs in a message. G DOMAIN_RATIO. :-) -- Daniel Quinlan ApacheCon! 13-17 November (3 SpamAssassin http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ http://www.apachecon.com/ sessions more)
[Bug 3930] [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 15:20 --- Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit URLs. I think it's more likely to cause the FN rate to go up. A trivial way around is to put in enough non-spam URIs such that the likelihood is that your spam URI won't be listed. I think a good work-around and improvement would be to change the randomization function to favor certain URLs: - earlier == higher probability - visible == higher probability - clickable == higher probability But, keep it random and allow even late/invisible/unclickable to be queried so we can't be completely fooled by some HTML trick. Perhaps we'll need a rule to look for too many URIs in a message. G DOMAIN_RATIO. :-) --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
