On 04/04/09 11:31 AM, "RobertH" <robe...@abbacomm.net> wrote:
>
> greetings...
>
> i am working at re-learning and applying SA fine tuning.
>
> in doing so, i have some across some real life SA scoring anomalies.
>
> it is interesting because one public reputaion service rule offering says to
> score "positive", i.e. spammy, spam, or blacklist, and another public
> reputation service says the opposite, i.e. negative score aka ham, hammy, or
> whitelist.
>
> eyebrow raising to say the least... ;-)
Well, we (they) all have different views of the reality out there.
I just ran a bunch of checks on some client IPs, they all were poor-to-good
(never above 75 on our system, but our site did indicate a very high risk
factor for the one IP I saw score a 75 ... Gotta talk to our developers
about that). on our system, but there were certainly variances from us to
SenderBase and Borderware's offerings. All depends on who sees what, when.
IMO, the reputation should have all been poor across the board, BTW.
> has anyone developed a basic script they can share that goes through and
> checks rule scoring logs email by email and looks for when specific types of
> rules (whitelist / blacklist or other reputation rules) should be in
> agreement, yet oppose each other?
>
> i realize that it is time sensative on some types of rules yet this is
> reputation based on actual domain name and ip address
Yes please. I'd love to see something like that.
--
Neil Schwartzman
Director, Accreditation Security & Standards
Certified | Safelist
Return Path Inc.
0142002038
