On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 01:48:46PM -0500, James Golovich wrote:
| On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, dman wrote:
| > On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 09:12:23AM -0600, Shane Williams wrote:
| > | I was looking at the porn expressions and scoring, and thought of an
| > | idea to shoot by everybody.
| > |
| > | If I'm reading the PORN_3 rule correctly,
| >
| > I had set all the PORN_* rules to 10.0 in my config. I kept getting a
| > significant number of normal tech/geek messages triggering the PORN_3
| > test, and a few triggered PORN_8 yesterday. I haven't gone through
| > the rule itself, but I cut the score down on those 2 tests. I second
| > the motion that the rule needs some improvement :-).
|
| I don't remember which PORN_* score it was hitting, but I get a lot of
| mail that has ip addresses x'd out. So it would hit on xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
| and mark it as spam.
Yeah, that was part of the contents of one of the messages falsely
matched by the test. I created a band-aid for that :
body IP_PLACE_HOLDER /xxx\.xxx\.xxx\.xxx/i
score -5
describe IP_PLACE_HOLDER Body has what appears to be an IP address place-holder
but haven't really tested it.
-D
--
The remote desktop feature of Windows XP is really nice (and *novel*!).
As a Microsoft consultant can *remotely* disable the personal firewall
and control the system. We'll ignore the fact that this tampering with
the firewall is not logged, and more importantly, that the firewall
isn't restored when the clowns from Redmond are done with their job.
-- bugtraq
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
