http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3417
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-05-27 12:56 ------- Thank you for answer! >Whitelist rules cannot be easily defeated by spammers - yours is. Many hacked servers have IPs, that not exists in any mx records of any domain. Spamers use the nets of thousands hacked computers to send spam. My rule can be forged easily as SPF rule, that included as plugin. >Whitelist rules need to have an S/O ratio below 0.1% - yours is not. My rule at corpus 50% hams and %50 spams have R/0 about 5% I think it is good. If I will check SPF records in my rule - S/0 will be better. Could you tell me R/0 of BAYES_00,BAYES_01,BAYES_05,BAYES_10, BAYES_25, AWL (AWL < -1), RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED,HABEAS_USER and SPF_CHECK (ham rules) on your big corpus? I think, they have R/0 more than 0.1% >Whitelist rules need to hit at least 0.1% of ham - yours does. 50% of ham - is very effective. 50% is more that 0.1% in 500 times. My rule has very good Hit Rate and it can compensate R/0 My rule totaly uncorelated with other rules - they not correlate with SPF, for example. >Blacklist rules should have an S/O ratio of 0.95 or better Ok, but it is assymetric to hams rules 1 - 0.1% = 99,9% = 0.999 Are you shure? :) ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
