On 03/06, John Hardin wrote: > If so, that wouldn't apply to just me. The entire "upload a corpus > for central scanning" wouldn't be a valid model at all. That it is > being done suggests otherwise and I just don't understand how that > part of it works.
That is a fascinating and dangerous assumption, that things are as they should be, and not just broken. I'm more comfortable assuming there is no way to handle trusted_networks when uploading corpora for mass checks, until somebody can tell me how I'm wrong. > Good point. However, I'd argue that the listserv should be behind a > spam filter, which wouldn't apply to a blind forwarding MTA. Unfortunately (for the simplicity of the question), I don't think that applies to whether a mailing list server should be accountable for spam it relays or not. One of my bigger concerns with saying that a mailing list server is not responsible for spam it sends to subscribers, and that they should be included in trusted_networks, is that it seems likely to result in trusted_networks maintenance getting completely out of hand for larger email providers using spamassassin. How many mailing list servers are there? -- "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - Henry Louis Mencken (1880-1956) http://www.ChaosReigns.com
