Am 14.05.2016 um 04:50 schrieb John Hardin:
On Sat, 14 May 2016, Reindl Harald wrote:Am 14.05.2016 um 04:04 schrieb John Hardin:How would a webservice be better? That would still be sending customer emails to a third party for processing.uhm you missed "and only give the rules which hitted and spam/ham flag out"Ah, OK, I misunderstood what you were suggesting. That wouldn't work. That tells you the rules they hit at the time they were scanned, not which rules they would hit from the current testing rules.
on the other hand it would reflect the complete mail-flow and not just hand-crafted samples
should be chained in a minimum negative score to count as ham and a minimum positive to count as spam - configureable because it depends on the local environment and adjustments which scores are clear classifications, 7.0 would here not be 100% spam, 12.0 would be as example
it would at least help in the current situation and with a rule like FSL_HELO_HOME when it hits only clear ham and has a high spam-score and when it only needs to be enabled, collects the information through scanning and submit the results once per day a lot of people running milter like setups with reject and no access to rejected mails could help to improve to auto-QA without collecting whole mails
Corpora with headers stripped does present a problem. The masscheck corpora should be complete as receivedand that is not possible - samples are stripped and anonymized
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
