> On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 12:01:54PM +0200, Jan Wagner wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tuesday 25 September 2007 11:22, Giles Westwood i wrote: >> > you send a mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] from a german ip >> > >> > I score you for germany +2 >> >> Hmm ... is sending mail from an IP, which is found to be related to a >> county >> in your geoip database, bad? Why do you score 2 points? > > I think it's a bit silly to score countries in the context of what > policyd-weight does. It weights helo/dns/etc with scoring tuned > specifically > for it. If you add something like this to the mix, it gets pretty badly > off-balanced I think? > > I do score countries myself, but I do it in SpamAssassin, since it takes > much more into consideration to prevent false positives.
We use a lot of whitelisting so fp's are not such an issue. I would like to tie scoring with other factors as it is a blunt tool but due to the low scoring it hasn't actually caused any problems and I only give high scores to some countries. The *combination* of my tweaks have definitely stopped some of the sneaky spammers getting through, I targeted the changes based on what got through the default policyd. I would be very interested in other peoples millage though. I specifically *don't* want to use SA because I've found it produces fp's and is a resource hog, I use dspam however, but only on final delivery... My combination of postgrey and policyd with my corporate related tweaks works great though and we're considering removing dspam as it's hardly needed. I'm afraid that I use policyd unmodified on a different server with lots of unrelated clients but I had to set reject levels very high because genuine mail was rejected. Someone on a adsl connection was sending out a paid for mailing list for their domain and policyd scored it 8.x... So depending on your client base policyd can be very effective or very problematic. g. ____________________________________________________________ Policyd-weight Mailinglist - http://www.policyd-weight.org/
