Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > On 20.02.09 19:26, Matt Kettler wrote: > >> Since you're bouncing any off-list emails because you reject my entire >> ISP, I'm going to drop out of aiding on this matter. >> > > I'm not rejecting "your ISP". I'm rejecting mail from addresses I could not > complain back to. > Very well, but you're also using a RBL with a known high risk of blocking nonspam email. This list was actually dropped from SA because the false positive rate became unacceptable, it actually matched more nonspam than it did spam! (51% of matches were nonspam and a total of 0.684% of all nonspam email matched this rule )
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4628 And you're doing this while requesting SA adjust a rule with very rare false positive. (0.4% of matches are nonspam, and a total of 0.0078% of all nonspam email hits this rule), on emails with garbage in the HELO. It seems clear to me that policies with false positives of up to 50% of their hits are acceptable to you, so the 0.4% false positive rate of the HELO message should be acceptable to you. >> Fix your own domain's over-zealous behaviors first. >> > > Fix your domain's RFC conformity first > I do not control this domain, it's a national ISP with "only" a few million subscribers. My other option here is Comcast, who has by far more egregious in their behaviors. Regardless, I'm disinclined to help someone complaining about rare false positive cases in SA while engaging in "aggressive" configurations for the rest of their systems that have false positive rates that are 2 orders of magnitude larger.
