On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 04:10:39PM -0600, Matt wrote:
> Does anyone see anything wrong with these scores? The RDNS_DYNAMIC
> worries me a bit since I know a few email servers hosted on dynamic
> looking reverse DNS's.
Well, first, the scores are really aggressive. Generally speaking, you don't
want single rules to make something considered spam due to the likely FP rate.
> score RCVD_IN_PBL 3
> score RCVD_IN_XBL 5
> score RDNS_NONE 5
> score RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL 3
> score RDNS_DYNAMIC 3
Here are my results for these from the last weekly mass-check run:
62.565 66.5706 0.1.000 1.000.00 RCVD_IN_PBL
34.530 36.7400 0.1.000 0.970.00 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL
57.274 60.9301 0.15310.997 0.940.00 RCVD_IN_XBL
35.354 37.5632 0.84940.978 0.780.10 RDNS_DYNAMIC
47.812 50.6487 3.49150.936 0.660.10 RDNS_NONE
IMO, the PBL is good enough for a 4.5 or so. SORBS_DUL seems similar. XBL is
probably worth a 2.5, and after that I would max out at 1.5 due to the high FP
rate.
> score SPF_FAIL 10
> score SPF_SOFTFAIL 5
> score SPF_NEUTRAL 2
If you wanted to give a small positive score for these, that might not be
terrible. Anything over 1 is asking for trouble IMO.
5.742 6.1008 0.13330.979 0.880.00 SPF_SOFTFAIL
2.536 2.6963 0.02470.991 0.880.00 SPF_NEUTRAL
4.554 4.8255 0.31610.939 0.820.00 SPF_FAIL
For completeness:
1.064 1.1314 0.00990.991 0.820.00 SPF_HELO_SOFTFAIL
3.515 0.4903 50.75810.010 0.520.00 SPF_PASS
0.000 0. 0.0.500 0.480.00 SPF_HELO_FAIL
0.000 0. 0.0.500 0.480.00 SPF_HELO_NEUTRAL
0.980 0.2159 12.92410.016 0.470.00 SPF_HELO_PASS
--
Randomly Selected Tagline:
You are dishonest, but never to the point of hurting a friend.
pgp2fYo6N5ktg.pgp
Description: PGP signature