Hi!
Honestly, I am sure I don't know /all/ he does for the community.
To submit a bug of that type, you need to have access to samples, and
per policy, he may not.
He dumped it on others to provide the evidence, in "Raymondish"
wording... but trust me, he's more that OK.
Sorry for the ranting. I didn't mean to insult Raymond or anyone else
knowing the problem but not providing samples.
I didnt take it up as a insult or anything. I just confirmed this is a
generic issue, next time i'll be silent, no problem at all.
I would suggest however that scoring rulkes with 4+ points inside SA is
not smart especially when this specific rule is famous about false
positives. Just search inside the tickets that have been open about this
rule. It must be in the top 10 false positive reports.
Its for the SA rule engine to pick this up.
But personally i think the SA corpus should be worked on. Its getting less
wide then it was used to be. The mass checks dont take place on the Ninja
list either since most of the mass checkers are offline.
The very wording and statement, that what was written, not implied,
triggered the community guy in me spending lots of time supporting and
caring about complete strangers -- who just happen to use this software
freely and free of charge.
Now back to business, there are samples in my inbox. ;)
Thats the problem with e-mail. ;)
Bye,
Raymond.
