http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4386
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-06-03 09:25 ------- > That's actually what I was talking about. The FP rate is horrible. I'm surprised, but I'll defer to real testing! > I have 0 hits for my personal ham, but several FPs on my hamtrap mails: > CNN, go.com, Simon & Schuster, etc. Only 1 for me for 20000 personal and "commercial" ham mails over the past year - which was an advert to renew virus scanner support which albeit legitimate was wholly unsurprisingly classifed as spam if you could see it's content. Maybe what you say might mean that the regexp should match an onMouseOver option that also mentions "status". But I'm not sure that's enough. I see some spams that obfuscate with calling javascript subroutines instead. But even with just plain matching of onmouseover, it would probably be able to confer some modest contribution to the score. After all, mails get 0.1 just for being HTML! Just like many rules that risk FPs. So the goal must surely be low FP, not 0 FP. OOI by contrast, an archive of spams over just 5 months resulted in over 200 hits for "onmouseover". But of course, more usefully, this would give some protection to the gullible. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
