On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Greg Troxel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Does anyone know how you can appeal or query a senderbase rating? > > I resisted answering at first, because I'm perhaps a bit too cynical: > > The way to appeal is to file a bug with spamassassin saying that > senderbase is bogus and ask that any senderbase rules in SA be > dropped. > > I don't know that spamassassin pays attention to senderbase; if not this > probablly won't work. I say this, mostly joking, from my experience > with habeas. I have gotten spam on multiple occasions from senders that > are HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI, and complained to habeas - with absolutely > zero useful response. I filed a bug: > > https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5902 > > and soon heard from habeas, who claimed that they revoked the listing of > that sender. > > I then got more spam from a different habeas-accredited spammer, and > complained privately to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and heard nothing back. > > So the only rational conclusion seems to be that habeas accreditation is > bogus, and they only respond to public pressure. Perhaps that's not > true and I've been unlucky, but that's how it feels from my end. >
After seeing similar spam from "accredited" senders, we disabled any score from the habeas rules long ago and have yet to notice any increase in FP (we have ~5000 fairly sensitive users who definitely let us know when things don't work as they want them to). I've know of other sites that have disabled the habeas rules/score as well with similar results. IMHO, they are not worth scoring on since they obviously do accredit sites that send UCE. Does anyone see any benefit from using habeus? Does it outweigh the spam that gets through because of them?
