http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-17 19:26 ---
Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit
URLs.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 07:19:04PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-17 20:03 ---
I have opened up the following ticket and copied Jeff's comment to the
description:
Bug 3976 [RFE] Invisible URIs should tend to be ignored
--- You are
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 12:05 ---
+1 . I was wondering what Sidney was talking about ;)
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 19:25 ---
Correction -- I forgot that I had not run make test since applying and trying
out the patch. This is from nmake test under Win32:
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 20:35 ---
Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit
URLs.
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 07:34:25PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, -1 on
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #2494 is|0 |1
obsolete|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-30 03:02 ---
Sorry for not noticing thatthe make test faiolure was not the resuolt of the
patch.
Tested the new patch in trunk and 3.0.2 branch.
+1 for the new patch
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 17:30 ---
Am I correct in understanding that the default value for uridnsbl_max_domains
is 20? Given how well (for most people) we have been doing with no limit,
should
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 09:10 ---
I applied the patch to URIDNSBL in my 3.0.1 install and it now honors the
default uridnsbl_max_domains of 20, but does not allow me to override that
setting in my
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 09:14 ---
Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit
URLs.
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 09:10:23AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I applied
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dev@spamassassin.apache.org
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:42 ---
This might also cause our FP rate to go down slightly, in any case I'm glad it
was trivial!
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:45 ---
Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit
URLs.
On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 02:42:49PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:45 ---
Will this avoid the crash in bug 3924 ?
If it reduces the number of sockets that are produced to less than the over 350
that the test case there generates, I
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:50 ---
Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit
URLs.
On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 02:45:27PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Will this
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 15:04 ---
Correction, 5 times, not 4 times, but only 1 for each URI with a numeric ip
address.
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC
I think it's more likely to cause the FN rate to go up. A trivial way
around is to put in enough non-spam URIs such that the likelihood is
that your spam URI won't be listed.
I think a good work-around and improvement would be to change the
randomization function to favor certain URLs:
-
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 15:20 ---
Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit
URLs.
I think it's more likely to cause the FN rate to go up. A trivial way
19 matches
Mail list logo
