On 4/7/2014 3:17 AM, Dave Warren wrote:
On 2014-04-06 17:21, John Hardin wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2014, Dave Warren wrote:
Is older ham useful? It specifically mentions that older spam isn't
useful, and why, but I'm thinking older ham is probably useful since
old mail clients and legitimately sent mail never dies. But I could
filter based on date.
There's some debate about that. :)
I personally agree with you. Others disagree.
I've been giving it some thought and I think that perhaps limiting it
to the last few months will make it easier to get a sane set of
TRUSTED_NETWORKS and INTERNAL_NETWORKS; I've got mail going back to
~2002 but no real recollection of how things were set up or named
prior to 2007 or so.
Initially I'll limit it to mail within the last couple of months, but
perhaps expand that up to 24-36 months for non-spam and 6 months for
spam, is that sane/reasonable?
I think 3 years makes a lot of sense for reasons I'd rather not discuss
on-list for fear the spammers will learn more than I will be able to
usefully convey.
Regards,
KAM
