> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Mark Martinec > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 6:25 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AMaViS-user] Marc: use SPF to prevent backscatter? > > > I find the extra 2.3 points for Windows XP, 1.3 for other > Windows, and -1 poins for Unix (non-Linux) quite valuable, > both for pushing the score over the limit for spam, or for > sparing a marginal ham on occasion. I thought (I'll look again) that there wasn't a clear 'Windows XP' signature. (all of the ones I saw also FPd since they included windows 2000 (servers|workstations)
> > Also, combined with a BOTNET plugin rules, it significantly > reduces false positives of this plugin. > > > So, if there a regex that it uses to know when not to bounce? > > For the moment it is hard-wired in sub delivery_status_notification: Might be a reason to reenable p0f. Wish it didn't gobble up so much cpu. Any thoughts on niceing it? _________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned and certified safe by SpammerTrap(tm). For Information please see http://www.spammertrap.com _________________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ AMaViS-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
