Spam Filtering broken - Only for Pop links' DNSRBL checks! (followups here, please)

elvey · 12 Jul 2003, 03:45 AM

New thread from here,

Quote:

Goodness, this whole spam/SCRBL score issue is now spread over 3 different threads. Maybe they could be joined, or a new one started...

Anyway, maybe I should give some of them a default of 0.5-2.0 score and see how it goes... -RobMueller

Ok, let's make all follow ups to this thread (merging from here , and here here, etc).

Yes, please give them a non-zero default score ASAP!

robmueller · 12 Jul 2003, 04:14 PM

I'll look into over the weekend if I can.

Rob

robmueller · 13 Jul 2003, 04:27 PM

I've added the following scores to the local SA config to check some more RBL's, and to hopefully lower the amazon.com whitelist problem...

This is still only for SMTP incoming email, pop links are still using the old 2.43 checking and config sorry.

score RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET 2.0
score RCVD_IN_DUL 1.0
score RCVD_IN_DUL_FH 1.0
score RCVD_IN_RBL 2.0
score RCVD_IN_RSS 2.0

score USER_IN_WHITELIST -4.000
score USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO -3.000

Rob

bitequator · 13 Jul 2003, 09:01 PM

No offense I'm just still curious. You'd asked why current SA version gives SpamCop BL zero weight (and it seems the same treatment for a few other BL's that you listed)? I assume the reason must've been discussed at some point in one of the mailing lists or NANAE (good reason?)...

Anyways, what's this user whitelist, I thought it's not implemented yet?

Kyle Babich · 13 Jul 2003, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bitequator
Anyways, what's this user whitelist, I thought it's not implemented yet?

I was just going to ask that.

DrStrabismus · 14 Jul 2003, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bitequator
No offense I'm just still curious. You'd asked why current SA version gives SpamCop BL zero weight (and it seems the same treatment for a few other BL's that you listed)? I assume the reason must've been discussed at some point in one of the mailing lists or NANAE (good reason?)...

Anyways, what's this user whitelist, I thought it's not implemented yet?

See http://www.emaildiscussions.com/...975#post121975 regarding the zero score and
http://www.emaildiscussions.com/...957#post121957 regarding the whitelist

elvey · 17 Jul 2003, 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bitequator
I assume the reason must've been discussed at some point in one of the mailing lists or NANAE (good reason?)...

Yup. Most recently: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=105804255700001&r=1&w=2

bitequator · 18 Jul 2003, 11:47 PM

Thanks a lot for the info Doc and Elvey (forgot to say)

elvey · 20 Jul 2003, 02:26 AM

You're welcome.

Oh, and a public thank you to Rob for fixing this from me too.

12 Jul 2003, 04:14 PM	#2
robmueller Intergalactic Postmaster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 6,102 Representative of: Fastmail.FM	I'll look into over the weekend if I can. Rob

13 Jul 2003, 04:27 PM	#3
robmueller Intergalactic Postmaster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 6,102 Representative of: Fastmail.FM	I've added the following scores to the local SA config to check some more RBL's, and to hopefully lower the amazon.com whitelist problem... This is still only for SMTP incoming email, pop links are still using the old 2.43 checking and config sorry. score RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET 2.0 score RCVD_IN_DUL 1.0 score RCVD_IN_DUL_FH 1.0 score RCVD_IN_RBL 2.0 score RCVD_IN_RSS 2.0 score USER_IN_WHITELIST -4.000 score USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO -3.000 Rob

13 Jul 2003, 09:01 PM	#4
bitequator The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: USA Posts: 2,978	No offense I'm just still curious. You'd asked why current SA version gives SpamCop BL zero weight (and it seems the same treatment for a few other BL's that you listed)? I assume the reason must've been discussed at some point in one of the mailing lists or NANAE (good reason?)... Anyways, what's this user whitelist, I thought it's not implemented yet?

18 Jul 2003, 11:47 PM	#8
bitequator The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: USA Posts: 2,978	Thanks a lot for the info Doc and Elvey (forgot to say)

20 Jul 2003, 02:26 AM	#9
elvey The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 2,458	You're welcome. Oh, and a public thank you to Rob for fixing this from me too.