Re: [SAtalk] false positives from VERY_SUSP_RECIPS

2002-02-20 Thread John Beck
+> ... would trigger false positives on +> a@domain, b@domain, ..., k@domain +> i.e., 11 (not 10) of the same domain would trigger this regardless of the +> local parts. Well, the SUSPICIOUS_[CC_]RECIPS macros seemed good, so I +> tweaked them ... Tom> Coincidentally, I just sent fixes for the

Re: [SAtalk] false positives from VERY_SUSP_RECIPS

2002-02-20 Thread Tom Lipkis
At Wed, 20 Feb 2002 16:16:56 -0800 John Beck wrote: > ... > would trigger false positives on > > a@domain, b@domain, ..., k@domain > > i.e., 11 (not 10) of the same domain would trigger this regardless of the > local parts. Well, the SUSPICIOUS_[CC_]RECIPS macros seemed good, so I > tweaked the

[SAtalk] false positives from VERY_SUSP_RECIPS

2002-02-20 Thread John Beck
(I learned about this yesterday and have it going; very nice.) Today I got a false positive which included among other things: SPAM: Hit! (2.29 points) Cc: contains similar usernames at least 10 times SPAM: Hit! (1.47 points) To: contains similar usernames at least 10 times neither of which was