spamassassin-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Quinlan <quin...@pathname.com>
Subject Re: Announcing SpamCopURI 0.08 support of SURBL for spam URI domain tests
Date Sat, 03 Apr 2004 00:23:51 GMT
jm@jmason.org (Justin Mason) writes:

> Side issue: why use easy removal without questions? Spammers do not have
> the bandwidth to remove themselves from every list.  If they *do* go to
> the bother, and a URL does get removed, then repeatedly crops up in spam
> again, it should be raised as an alarm -- and possibly brought to the
> notice of other people -- e.g. this list or others.

I'm not so sure easy removal is actually a good idea.  I think it's
better to have FP-prevention mechanisms that don't require attention of
the email sender.

Why?  Because it's a mechanism biased towards savvy users, people who
use blacklists, SpamAssassin, etc.  In addition, it's exactly the same
folks who are already overrepresented in our ham corpus.  So, the
effective FP rate will be higher than it appears in our corpus *and*
non-savvy senders will be penalized.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Quinlan                     anti-spam (SpamAssassin), Linux,
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/    and open source consulting

Mime
View raw message