Some thoughts in line below. On Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 12:13 RW <rwmailli...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 19:56:49 -0500 > Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > > > > We have the ability to automatically determine rules that are not > > needed and use zero scores to turn them off. > > A lot of them are core rules which should really be removed properly. > With the way that the rules are generated, scored, qa'd, etc. This concept has worked for us for years. > > > To my knowledge in the history of the project, no one is ever looked > > at turning rules off and especially not doing so with meta rules. > > Maybe there's a difference in trunk, but otherwise the sub-rules > that do the work still run when they aren't used, so there's little > benefit. > I believe if you look you'll find that we actually redefine some of the rules and then score them zero just for that purpose but if you find any that look to be still running please let me know. According to a comment in "KAM_heavyweight.cf" 15% comes from... > I wouldn't put too much reading into that specific comment. Heavyweight was my first idea for how to improve the set and then the dead weight and then the dead weight too and then the dead weight for meta. Then others like Karsten figured out how we could actually disable meta rules. Throughout all of it we've maintained a baseline machine and corpora to do comparisons for efficiency and efficacy that takes into account the entire system. We've also been working heavily on improving the entire SA, especially Giovanni, because the code got significantly slower with some of the recent CVEs. Which we have also been able to use on a baseline machine too. Regards, KAM >
