I wrote:
Another aspect of this flaw is the heavy positive weights posessed by some mailers. This is easily added to a spam mail for bonus points, so I tend to view any USER_AGENT rule with a score less than -2 as being highly questionable, making an easy target for spam white listing.To further clarify that, 2.43 doesn't have such absurdly high negative scores, except kmail which is a little under -2. In fact, the scores of 2.41 are bad enough in general that I question why anyone actually even runs 2.41 ;)
At 12:37 PM 10/30/2002 -0500, Tim Helton wrote:
I got a spam today, that hit many rules, and still only got a 0.6-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BASE64_ENC_TEXT,CUSTOM_FREE_HD,CUSTOM_GET_FREE DATE_MISSING,FORGED_AOL_RCVD,IN_REP_TO,MISSING_MIMEOLE REMOVE_PAGE,SPAM_PHRASE_01_02,SUBJECT_HAS_DATE SUB_FREE_OFFER,USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_MUTT,USER_AGENT_OE WEB_BUG version=2.41 It looks like it was abusing the "USER_AGENT" negative scoring to gain -5.5 points score USER_AGENT_OE -0.3 score USER_AGENT_MUTT -4.109 score USER_AGENT -1.143 Maybe it would be beneficial to see if more than 1 user agent is detected, and give it a +2, instead of a -5
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by: Influence the future of Java(TM) technology. Join the Java Community Process(SM) (JCP(SM)) program now. http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?sunm0004en
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
