mouss wrote:
I here mean that you can't go as a "std crusader" and at the same time
break the standards by tagging std compliant mail. statistics are no
excuse for rejecting/tagging mail.
I'm not being a "std crusader". I'm simply pointing out that someone
going there own way shouldn't expect everyone to accept their way,
especially when there's an established majority going the other way.
Just because a mail is "standards compliant" doesn't mean that we can't
use statistical methods to decide if it may or may not be spam.
"break the standards be tagging std complaint mail" has to be the
funniest thing I've heard all day. Both standards complaint and
non-complaint mail can be spam. Would you rather we decide all
standards complaint mail is ham? That seems rather nonsensical to me.
The reality, though, is that a greater proportion of non-complaint mail
is spam than the proportion of complaint mail.
The notion that "statistics are no excuse for rejecting/tagging mail" is
even more worrisome. Statistics are the basis for rejecting/tagging
mail and any other non-trivial activity in life.
I lately saw an FP with RCVD illegal IP, because of a 127.0.0.80 IP.
while this rarely used, it's not illegal. so the rule is just bogus IMHO.
50_scores.cf:score RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP 1.585 0.234 1.813 0.288
With a set 3 score of 0.288, I'd say this isn't a big hitter anyway.
sub check_for_illegal_ip {
my ($self) = @_;
foreach my $rcvd ( @{$self->{relays_untrusted}} ) {
# (note this might miss some hits if the Received.pm skips any invalid IPs)
foreach my $check ( $rcvd->{ip}, $rcvd->{by} ) {
return 1 if ($check =~ /^(?:
(?:[01257]|22[3-9]|23[0-9]|24[0-9]|25[0-5])\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+|
127\.[1-9]\.\d+\.\d+|
127\.0\.[1-9]\.\d+|
127\.0\.0\.(?:\d\d+|[2-9])
)$/x);
}
}
return 0;
}
Although, I do think that the check is a little weird. It's completely
valid (although not statistically common in the mass-check corpora) to
have a non-routable IP in anything but that first untrusted relay.
The bottom line is, if the statistics generated based on the current
score generation mass-check submitters don't meet your needs, you're
always welcome to participate in future score generation mass-checks.
Daryl
