https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6844

--- Comment #7 from Kris Deugau <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > We'll check FSL_UA / FSL_XM_419
> > 
> > AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 is autogenerated
> > 
> > These rules are basically dead safe to even use them to reject mail at smtp
> > level.
> > 
> > "user is an ISP customer" is not a reason to compromise spam detection &
> > lower a score  just because a user intentionally runs totally
> > outdated/insecure software.
> 
> I'll disagree. Rules are written for real-world experience and SA is not a
> security product enforcing patches and software upgrades.  If the rule hits
> on ham in real-world experience, it should be scored lower.  
> 
> What's the S/O on all three of these rules like?

0     26.3995     0.0011     1.000     0.97     1.00     FSL_XM_419
0     26.4033     0.0011     1.000     0.97     1.59     FSL_UA
0     26.3462     0.0011     1.000     0.97     2.01    
AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2

So they aren't hitting very much ham, but there's still some out there.

However, I was more concerned about the overlap;  SA's duplicate rule detection
can't pick up on cases like this.  The FP is basically a side effect of the
overlap.

Looking at the SA log locally, I expect a lot of those 26% of spam hits from
the mass-check info also hit Spamhaus DNSBL rules;  we block with Spamhaus at
the MTA so the full ruleset only gets run on a small percentage of mail. 
Locally, they hit ~2.5% of mail.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to