-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
"Gregory Sloop" writes: >In the last 24 hours or so, I, personally, have gotten at least five >messages which were forged spam habeas marked. > >The habeas score probably let these get through. (I have no idea exactly how >many caught spams also had habeas headers - I'm just including the ones I >saw.) > >Habeas may not be a scumbag corp, but IMHO, at the current time, the warrant >mark is a lost cause and is much more likely *for me* to indicate spam >rather than something I want to see. I expect for 99.5% of the population I >support, the same is true. Thus, a positive score for Habeas wouldn't be out >of line. > >In short, I understand the rant a bit, but disagree on the conclusions >entirely. Well, we're working on fixes now. Let's just say, it appears we may be able to use the Habeas forgery as a spamsign in certain circumstances ;) Interestingly, I'm getting *none* with forged Habeas hdrs. I'm increasingly sure that at least some of the top spammers are sharing list-washing data on known spamtraps, since this is the third spamsign variant I've received no copies of. - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFAUMHXQTcbUG5Y7woRAvO/AKDJ8oTC+ODzUxsFZ5usB9bQ/4Gk0QCfcF7W BToJQpvdsMc/1TbnglkXX2U= =OWhe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
