On Tue, April 1, 2008 21:43, Jo Rhett wrote:
> On Mar 28, 2008, at 6:21 PM, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 06:09:03PM -0700, Jo Rhett wrote:
>>> I think that mail from self to self should be ignored by the AWL.
>>> (it's harder to forged mail from a regular correspondent, so this
>>> makes AWL more useful)
>>
>> If you know the mail is from you, don't waste the resources
>> scanning the
>> message at all.
>
> This was a spam I'm talking about.
>
> I'm not worried about mail from self to self. I'm annoying because
> AWL is decreasing forged spam score so far that the SPF failure
> doesn't catch.
INSERT INTO `awl` VALUES('amavis', '[EMAIL PROTECTED]', '80.166', 4, -14,
'2008-04-02 00:02:15');
INSERT INTO `awl` VALUES('amavis', '[EMAIL PROTECTED]', 'none', 1, -8.5,
'2008-04-01
23:55:23');
it seems it works here, none is when its sent from localhost, 80.166 is when
sent outside localhost, so problem is ?
well i added the last field for when it was last updated to be used when i
cleanup the awl table
Benny Pedersen
Need more webspace ? http://www.servage.net/?coupon=cust37098
