On Mon, 26 Jul 2021, RW wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 18:05:35 +0100
RW wrote:
"&& !DKIM_SIGNED " means the rule can only be true if there's no
signature, so none of the terms with __DKIM_DEPENDABLE, DKIM_VALID,
and DKIM_VALID_AU make any difference.
Actually it's worse than that __DKIM_DEPENDABLE is always true if there
are no signatures, so !DKIM_SIGNED && !__DKIM_DEPENDABLE is always
false.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Those are "FP exclusions", not part of the base rule logic - generated by
inspecting the rulequ results and excluding hits on other rules where the
combination is hammy and not (or very weakly, like 1%) spammy. The
interactions of combinations of those exclusions isn't considered.
They also need to be reviewed periodically, which I'm doing now for XPRIO.
__DKIM_DEPENDABLE is no longer a useful FP exclusion for XPRIO, as it hits
100% of the spam hits.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhar...@impsec.org pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maxim IX: Never turn your back on an enemy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
8 days until the 286th anniversary of John Peter Zenger's acquittal
