Re: [SAtalk] Extending the AWL concepts to URIs found in Spam Body

* Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-10-24 20:56]: > It's in Bayes.pm -- worth taking a look, if you like. CHEW_BODY_URIS > is the switch that turns it on, on by default. Thanks for the direction. I promise to study this before I ask further questions on this topic ;-) > I do think a distrib

Re: [SAtalk] Extending the AWL concepts to URIs found in Spam Body

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alex Pleiner writes: >* Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-10-23 21:19]: >> Alex Pleiner writes: >> > Wouldn't the URIs mentioned in Spam be good keys for some kind of >> > auto-whitelisting with a similar mechanism as for AWL? > >> They already a

Re: [SAtalk] Extending the AWL concepts to URIs found in Spam Body

* Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-10-23 21:19]: > Alex Pleiner writes: > > Wouldn't the URIs mentioned in Spam be good keys for some kind of > > auto-whitelisting with a similar mechanism as for AWL? > They already are in SpamAssassin 2.60. They're tokenized heavily, > and it gives appreci

Re: [SAtalk] Extending the AWL concepts to URIs found in Spam Body

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alex Pleiner writes: > Fellow Spamfighter, > > while preparing some slides for an anti-spam workshop I reread Paul > Graham's "Will Filters Kill Spam" at > . > > Wouldn't the URIs mentioned in Spam be good keys f

[SAtalk] Extending the AWL concepts to URIs found in Spam Body

Fellow Spamfighter, while preparing some slides for an anti-spam workshop I reread Paul Graham's "Will Filters Kill Spam" at . Wouldn't the URIs mentioned in Spam be good keys for some kind of auto-whitelisting with a similar mechanism as for AWL? While the f