[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Bob Proulx said: > > Running Debian stable is not a good reason to avoid upgrading > > spamassassin to the best available version. > > Thus my conditional, "as long as it's working well." 2.64 is working for > me, and VERY well: ~99% spam hits. I see no reason to upgrade unless the > spammers start getting around it somehow.
Of course I can't argue with that. > What makes you say 3.0.2 is the "best" version? I was not getting 99% with SA-2.6x. I was starting to get a large number of spam messages that cut through SA like a hot knife through warm butter. SA-3.x includes SURBL. That by itself is huge. And of course there were other improvements too. My results improved significantly after upgrading to SA-3.x. > Will I suddenly get an accuracy boost to 99.999%? I really find it hard to believe you were getting 99% out of sa-2.64. In my case I would guess it was getting to be more like 90%. But everyone gets a different mix of different types of spam. > > But I would go so far as to claim that if you are interacting with > > the quite hostile Internet then you must keep the software that is > > doing the interacting up to date. > > You must keep on top of security vulnerabilities, yes. Asserting that > new software == more secure software is a fallacy. Who said anything about new software? I said "up to date". That is quite different. Remember, I am running Debian stable. Obviously that already means I both know the difference and value it. :-) However in some cases the best software is newer software. It is a judgement call. IMNHO 3.x is the best software to be running today. > > Your system may be stable but the Internet is not. > > Which is why good spam filtration and virus checking software gets > dynamic information from pattern update servers, RBLs, SURBL, Razor, > DCC, etc. etc. etc. But wait, SA 2.x did not have SURBL support! If you are really only using 2.64 then you should not claim to be using SURBL. And if you are using SURBL and have backported all of the features of 3.x into 2.x then aren't you really using 3.x? > In a nutshell: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Because apparently it was broke and you apparently did fix it. :-) Bob
