On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 14:32 -0700, RobertH wrote:
> i have problems with the cabletv.org email list.
> it is hosted on a charter static and has wierd reverse dns etc etc blah.
Nope, you don't. You got a problem with your custom rules.
> here is what it is tripping on...
>
> 0.7 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D Host starts with d-d-d-d
> 1.2 HOST_EQ_STATIC HOST_EQ_STATIC
> 0.7 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB Host is d-d-d-d
> 1.3 HOST_EQ_CHARTER HOST_EQ_CHARTER
Neither of these is in stock SA 3.2.5, nor pulled by sa-update for any
3.2.x version. Sorry, too lazy to check all old and not-updated
versions. Minus 3.9...
> 1.9 TVD_RCVD_IP TVD_RCVD_IP
> 0.5 FROM_NOT_REPLYTO From: does not match Reply-To:
Not stock SA, and *does* happen frequently on lists. Local rule.
> -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
> [score: 0.0000]
> 1.5 SAGREY Adds 1.0 to spam from first-time senders
Custom, third-party plugin. Use at your own risk. Explicitly mentions in
the description, to add 1.0 points -- raised arbitrarily by you. Local
rule, local problem.
> can someone help me formulate a good rule to reduce scoring.
You do not need a good negative scoring rule (besides proposals for
rules already posted), you seriously need to review your custom rules.
According to your rules hit, stock SA merely would score 1.9 for the
single TVD_RCVD_IP hit. Plus Bayes (which affects this rule's score) and
even subtracts significantly for you.
1.9 -- this is a local problem with your custom rules.
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
