On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 14:23:44 -0600
Kang , Joseph S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The HABEAS_VIOLATOR test is nice for those sites that also have SA do
network tests. MINE DOESN'T.
For next runs of GA, maybe HABEAS rules should have four scores. So we
could have something like:
score HABEAS_SWE
On Monday 19 January 2004 23:06, David A. Carter wrote:
Before turning off Habeas (or even worse, giving it a positive score),
please take time to read this thread, particularly Bob Proulx's response.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general/38623
I'd read that thread
- I have little alternative but to zero their
HABEAS_SWE score.
Daz
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Michael Satterwhite
Sent: 20 January 2004 11:25
To: David A. Carter;
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Turning off Habeas?
On Monday 19
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Michael Satterwhite
Sent: 20 January 2004 11:25
To: David A. Carter; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Turning off Habeas?
On Monday 19 January 2004 23:06, David A. Carter wrote:
Before turning off Habeas (or even worse, giving it a
positive
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 20 January 2004 07:45, Alan Munday wrote:
Does this not boil down to the globally effective legal footprint for
Habeas?
That is if you are a spammer and originate from outside this footprint you
won't have any problems abusing the
will follow suite and turn this rule off too.
Terry
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Douglas Kirkland
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 9:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Turning off Habeas?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 10:43:05AM -0600, Terry Shows wrote:
FYI:
I checked my SPAM Rejection log, and found two occurrences this
morning where a spammer put the Hebeas headers in the email, but it
was classified as SPAM anyway (scores of 30+ each).
This appears to confirm that spammers
Don't do that! You'll miss out on the HABEAS_VIOLATOR rule.
Set it to -0.001 if you want, but don't kill it off.
HABEAS_VIOLATOR is good for
+16.
A lot of people on this list need to calm down and stop over-reacting.
The HABEAS_VIOLATOR test is nice for those sites that also have SA
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Scott
Lambert
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Turning off Habeas?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 10:43:05AM -0600, Terry Shows wrote:
FYI:
I checked my SPAM Rejection
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 02:44:32PM -0600, Terry Shows wrote:
Maybe it is good for -16, but in every case I looked at that passed
thought with habeas set, none of them set the violator, and every
single one was flagrantly spam.
+16 not -16 just so people reading the archives don't get the wrong
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Terry Shows wrote:
Maybe it is good for -16, but in every case I looked at that passed thought
with habeas set, none of them set the violator, and every single one was
flagrantly spam.
[snip..]
The way it is now, it is just another header that can be added by a spammer,
Scott Lambert wrote:
Your idea turns the HABEAS_SWE test into a network test.
Actually it _is_ a network test: It relies on legal means to shut down
violators and the HIL to block ip addresses whose use of the Habeas
headers can't be or has not yet been stopped by legal means.
Instead of
It has been almost 24 hours since I received the last spam
with Habeas
headers. Possibly my ISP has added a filter to block the
pharmacourt.biz
spam before I see it ... Has anybody else noticed that their spam has
stopped in the past day?
I thought I had noticed the same but wasn't
At 02:39 PM 1/20/2004, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
Has anybody else noticed that their spam has stopped in the past day?
Yep. the last one I saw was around 3am - 12 hours ago. Last week I was
getting 100-150 daily. I just routed them into their own folder, and once
a day I'd mail off a couple of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 20 January 2004 14:29, David B Funk wrote:
One quick rule hack that has worked wonders for me for this issue:
uri
L_FAKE_MED_SITE
Hi,
There is a feature called habeas that gives spam a negative weight.
It is apparently a mark that certifies that e-mail is not spam. It does
not
work and all the spam I am getting now is because of that mark. I can't
imagine I would be missing anything if I just disabled this.
On Monday 19 January 2004 19:56, Matt Yackley wrote:
Don,
The default tests and scores can be found in /usr/share/spamassassin
Search Google or the archives for a *lot* of talk about the HABEAS_SWE
test and the recent problems. People like Theo use the Habeas mark in
their messages, so
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:01:36PM -0600, Michael Satterwhite is rumored to have said:
You'd have to agree that a message with the
headers is more likely spam than not ... right now.
...unless you converse with me via e-mail with any regularity...
Have you actually checked to see how many
Quoting Michael Satterwhite [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I know what habeas is *SUPPOSED* to do, but right now it really isn't
working.
and
Personally, I've set its scoring to zero, but I do understand those that
are
giving it a positive score. You'd have to agree that a message with the
19 matches
Mail list logo
