On 7/17/2014 11:30 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Kevin A. McGrail skrev den 2014-07-17 17:14:
It's VERY odd to have little spam. That's the easiest to get.
Something is wrong likely with one masschecker's system such as
vacation is my guess. I just don't have time right now to dig into
who is/isn't submitting.
what will happend when it commes ?
will it be used in the backlog, how many days backlog ?
No. The system will use the logs that match that night or that weeks
svn revision. If someone is off kilter on submitting, the logs are
wasted currently is my believe.
for my suggesting of make uridnsbl over to a list of waigted bl on how
many days not seen in spamassassin -r reported as spam could really
help more then just rescoreing spam imho
lets say if any url is not seen in reports in 30 days, it could very
well be ham
basicly just as awl seen today, just for urls
btw awl code does not filter http:// urls in the awl database, or is
it just when spamassassin -R is used ?
the url should not depend on whats is listed, just what is reported as
spam, and if reported keep it listed localy as spam for that domains
that a spam contains in this mail
if i could code this in perl with spamassassin api i have done it long
time ago
Agreed. I'm working on some BL enhancements and trying to get some ASF
support for them so far without any traction.
