spamassassin-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reindl Harald <>
Subject Re: FSL_HELO_HOME: deep headers again
Date Sat, 14 May 2016 02:59:00 GMT

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 received
>> and that is not possible - samples are stripped and anonymized

View raw message