On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 11:44:59 -0400 Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 08:27:02AM -0700, Potato Chip wrote: > > -3.3 ALL_TRUSTED Most of these unmarked spams hit ALL_TRUSTED with a > > default score of -3.3. It almost completely discounts the SURBL > > score hits. > > If you're getting ALL_TRUSTED hits on messages that came from the > outside through a non-trusted server, then something it up there. The > reports I've seen about it so far are related to something like an > anti-virus gateway not adding in proper Received headers, passing the > mail to SpamAssassin. > > > Have most people changed the default SURBL scores to something more > > meaningful, higher? It seems worthy of a higher score given the > > great reviews that SURBL has been getting? > > SURBL is great, but it does get FPs. If you don't mind that (and the > possibility of having SA FP the mail into the "spam" category), go > ahead and up the score. :) > That is exactly what we have done since SURBL is a big benefit we get from using SA. People keep forgetting that it is easy to change scores in local.cf. <2cents>That said, 3.0 is the first version I've ever found it easier to take all the scores, copy them to local.cf, comment them out and then simply uncomment those we need to change. In other words, we do find a greater need to increase scores. They may be statistically valid, but there may also be a reason the phrase, "lies, damn lies and statistics", was uttered long ago. ;-)</2cents> -- Robin Lynn Frank Director of Operations Paradigm-Omega, LLC http://www.paradigm-omega.com Our view: Moving jobs overseas is treason. SpamTrap: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpZv5JasaiMc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
