On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 03:04:23 -0700 (PDT), Praveen wrote: >Hi, > From the man page it appears that spamd relies on >static information about spam originators. >Why not a more dynamic scheme ?. > >Why not run the content of the mail through a spam >detector (like dspam), find the spam score and make >decisions based on that. I know that spam detection >is no where near perfect but it can be used for >assigning a 'badness score' to a site(originator of >email). So a site keeps getting this score and the >average (per msg) exceeds a we black list the site for >fixed duration. Similarly for white listing. > >'Badness score' and also be assigned for other things, >like trying to send to non-existant user (a typical >spammer probe), absence of mx entry etc. > > >A milter(sendmail/postfix) can be implemented for >this. >Thus decisions will be more dynamic and 'configuration >free'. > >Does this sound reasonable ? >
No. That would make spamd into bloatware and much less efficient. People who want milters, content-inspection, RBL lookups and whatever can run them in conjunction with their MTA. spamd does all I want it to do with no measureable load on my system. I do NO content inspection and there have been only 3 spams total which got to any user in this domain since 1/1/7. Content inspection practitioners are always playing catchup and fiddling with ham/spam training for their toys and then along comes the next trick of the spammers = back to square one. Thanks to beck@ and company I don't have to play that silly game. R\/\/. In the beginning was The Word and The Word was Content-type: text/plain The Word of Rod.
