Matt Kettler wrote:
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
The result will be no URIBL only FPs. OTOH, you may end up with a
shit-ton of people bitching about spam accuracy dropping in stock 3.2
installs if you make these changes.
I'm not sure it'd be *that* bad.
A grep of my logs from this week shows that 1.1% of my spam scores under
a score of 8 and only 13% of those spams hit *any* URIBLs.
So yeah, there'd be more FNs, but I'm not sure that it'd a shit-ton of
them.
Well, you have to realize though that the impact of a quad-listed URI is on the
order of 15 points. So you could still have plenty of spams that are only
hitting URIBLs.
Ah, true. In that case it raises the possibility of URIBLs being
deterministic to 1.8% of my spam.
Anyway... I think a solution may be to write meta rules that result in
each of the current rules (effectively) keeping their current scores,
but using only the maximum of all of them in the final total.
ie.
If URIBL_LIST1 has a score of 2 and URIBL_LIST2 has a score of 4:
score URIBL_LIST1 0.001
score URIBL_LIST2 0.001
meta URIBL_LIST_HIGHEST_LIST1 (URIBL_LIST1 && !URIBL_LIST2)
score URIBL_LIST_HIGHEST_LIST1 2
meta URIBL_LIST_HIGHEST_LIST2 (URIBL_LIST2 && !URIBL_LIST1)
score URIBL_LIST_HIGHEST_LIST2 4
...a bit of a pain to update, but might be more effective.
Daryl
