spamassassin-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bowie Bailey <Bowie_Bai...@BUC.com>
Subject Re: emailreg.org - tainted white list
Date Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:12:33 GMT
Christian Brel wrote:
> The point comes back to this and it has *not* been answered sensibly;
> WHY DOES SPAMASSASSIN DEFAULT INSTALL WITH A NEGATIVE SCORING RULE THAT
> FAVOURS A COMMERCIAL BULK MAILER. Namely the negative score for Habeas?
>   

This point has been answered.  SA ships with that rule because the rule
was useful and the score made sense at the time.  It obviously needs to
be re-addressed to take into account the changes that have occurred with
the whitelist, and this is already being done for the next SA release.

> Ship it with a 0.0 score, the problem goes. Leave it as it is and it
> smells corrupt. It's that old addage. If it looks corrupt, and it
> smells corrupt, it's probably corrupt.
>
> Perhaps the time has come for a fork of Spamassassin where these
> commercial considerations are not so obvious?

I really don't care who creates the whitelists and blacklists that SA
uses.  The only thing that really matters is how effective they are.  If
a blacklist blocks spammers without blocking too many legitimate mails,
use it.  If a whitelist allows legitimate mail without sending through
too many spams, use it.  Even lists that have a fair number of false
hits are useful in SA -- just with lower scores.

("legitimate mail" in this context means mail that the end user wishes
to receive...bulk or otherwise)

-- 
Bowie

Mime
View raw message