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:
What you said. Yes (4/30 = Friday, this is why we don't buy cars made on a
Friday) so the results would be the same except for the 0 BASEPOINT which
means a not-triggered for -5
I will add the ability of using a negative weight for the BASEPOINT as
this gives customers more flexibility on w
Hi Dave,
Let's keep the BasePoint a separate discussion.
Here's what you sent on 4/30:
(SNIFFER RETURN) x 10 - (BASEPOINT) = Result
So - since "left" of zero (negative) are the good reputation and "right" of
zero (positive) are bad reputation, and you are subtracting the basepoint
(
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
Excellent - THANKS!
-Original Message-
From: supp...@declude.com [mailto:supp...@declude.com] On Behalf Of David
Barker
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 2:44 PM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SNFIP option for "WHITE"?
The exit codes are as follows:
Unknown = 0
The exit codes are as follows:
Unknown = 0
White = 1
Normal = 2
New = 3
Caution = 4
Black = 5
Truncate = 6
The format in Declude would be.
TESTNAMETESTTYPEX EXITCODEWEIGHT-TRIGGERED
WEIGHT-NOTTRIGGED
SNFIPWHITE SNFIP X 1 -50
Hi Dave,
Thanks - I don't want to upset your development schedule (naturally, I can
cope with things as they are) - just wanted to make sure it's on someone
else list .
Best Regards,
Andy
From: supp...@declude.com [mailto:supp...@declude.com] On Behalf Of David
Barker
Sent: Monday, May
Hi Dave (just in case this one got lost),
>> Also even though there are multiple entries the test only runs once and
the resulted exit code is the triggered. <<
I know that all 18 "SNF" rule lines only require one invocation of Sniffer -
which are then evaluated 18 different way. Fair enough.
I will check with engineering. If this is an easy change I will get it in an
interim soon, also with the "nonzero" for SNF as we discussed in an earlier
thread.
From: supp...@declude.com [mailto:supp...@declude.com] On Behalf Of Andy
Schmidt
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 1:10 PM
To: declude.junkm
Hi Dave,
I agree with you that the total weight of 9 is correct (I had already
"piecemealed" that arithmetic together in my msg).
>> As Commtouch Zerohour was implemented differently that regular tests
(because it runs as part of the AV code) it is not listed in this log line.
Agreed it sh
-Original Message-
From: supp...@declude.com [mailto:supp...@declude.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Comerford
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 7:45 PM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Enumerating and Weighting IP4R/RHSBL/DNSBL
te
The Tests failed (Triggered) showing tests that ARE triggered. In this case:
Tests failed [weight=9]:
SPFPASS=IGNORE[-2]
CONTENT=IGNORE[7]
ZEROHOUR=WEIGHT[6]
Total: 11
As nIPNOTINMX:-2 is NOT triggered it cannot be in the same list of emails
that ARE triggered, providing the -2
Hi Dave,
I do have SOME tests suppressed from the SMTP headers:
HIDETESTS CATCHALLMAILS IPNOTINMX NOLEGITCONTENT WEIGHTKILL2
WEIGHT8 WEIGHT10 WEIGHTHDR WEIGHTFOOTER NJABL AHBL SORBS SENDERDB
WEIGHTGATEWAY
So the SMTP header looks correct - and the weight of 9 is accurate:
13 matches
Mail list logo
