-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Sean Doherty writes: > On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 15:04, Dave Goodrich wrote: > > > Check out trusted_network section of Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf > > > i.e no RBL tests on trusted networks. > > "If you're running with DNS checks enabled, SpamAssassin includes code > > to infer your trusted networks on the fly, so this may not be necessary. > > (Thanks to Scott Banister and Andrew Flury for the inspiration for this > > algorithm.) This inference works as follows:" > > > > This seems backwards to me. If a user does nothing, then his network > > will be considered trusted by default? We are an ISP, and SA is running > > on our toasters. I don't want any machine trusted as that leaves a door > > open for my smtp relay users (viruses, trojans, just bad folks) to spam > > local users. > > > > JMHO, but shouldn't all networks be considered untrusted unless a user > > specifies otherwise? > > I got to agree with you there - especially given that the inference > algorithm doesn't work in every environment. the idea is that an ISP *will* take the time to set that setting. ;) - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD4DBQFBimZxMJF5cimLx9ARAm7VAJdjojaKXz6t++f5BwK+ocf0jT5cAKChSgLF 7Wrsz2oohTyTjYLaJktIuA== =LLyQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----