On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Justin Mason wrote:
> Bugtraq messages do not trigger FPs half as frequently as e.g.
> Lockergnome or ZDNet HTML newsletters.
Some might consider tagged ZDNet HTML newsletters to be TPs.
--
Theodore Heise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> West Lafayette, IN, USA
-
Matt Kettler said:
> Bugtraq is particularly prone to being razored, as some people still have
> razor auto-reporting based on spamassassin scores enabled.
BTW, I can't be sure, but my theory is that the bugtraq-in-Razor thing is
not anything to do with SpamAssassin; more likely is that some s
Yeah, that's the main reason why razor2 was designed with a submitter
rating system. This way the people that wind up auto-submitting mailing
lists and other non-spam get ignored. Razor1 has no built-in way of
recognizing "this guy submits a lot of non-spam, ignore him". The best you
can do is
> "RGRB" == Ralf G R Bergs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
RGRB> Is there a way to determine WHO did this and to stop them from
RGRB> adding more false positives?
This is, I believe, one of the major advantages to using Razor2. You
can't do what you are asking with Razor1.
---
Hi there,
who on earth registers all these false positives in Razor?! Each day I get a
couple of false positives over the Debian-User mailing list, messages that are
CLEARLY NO SPAM:
>Message-ID: <007901c25f5d$d31aa050$805b4181@damien>
>From: "Joe Emenaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PRO
