hi guenther, On Sun, 2004-01-25 at 19:54 +0100, guenther wrote: > cheers( hackers ); > > I want to propose some small changes to the default SA scores and rules. > About two weeks ago Spammer(s) started to misuse the Habes [1] watermark > to identify non-SPAM (aka HAM). Seems like there is currently a lot of > SPAM with this faked headers. > > The current score for this watermark is -8 [2]. This lets a lot of this > kind of SPAM slip through (that would not otherwise) and there are even > a lot of reports about auto-learning those messages as HAM on the SA > mailing list. > > The current score is based on the mass tests before this kind of SPAM > was known and this watermark indeed was a sign of HAM those days. I > suspect, most users will get more SPAM as HAM with this watermark today. > :-/ > > > The attached adjustments would eliminate this issue. > > 1) Setting the HABEAS_SWE rule to 0 effectively will disable this test. > As a result, no valid Habes marked mails will get added HAM points, but > the Spammers don't profit by it either.
I think we may temporarily zero it. The Habeas watermarking method doesn't look very strong to me ;-) > 2) Excluding the Habeas headers from Bayes would be good too. Otherwise, > getting more SPAM as HAM with this faked headers will poison the Bayes > database and HAM will get bad Bayes scores. I am not sure about this. It may cause trouble in case the bayes db is already poisoned. Otherwise it should work OK. cheers Radek _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
