> On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Jennifer Wheeler wrote:
>
> > > 'Bigevil.cf' -- never once seen in ham.
> > > 'Maybeevil.cf' -- a small number of hits in ham
>
> Here's a suggestion:
>
> Rather than try to filter into two files, leave Bigevil as-is. Place
> questionable domains that appear in Bigevil into another file (I don't
> know that Maybeevil is the best name, but whatever). Use a META rule
> such that domains that get hit by *both* Bigevil and Maybeevil get a
> positive score added back, to offset the Bigevil negative.
>
> This removes the burden of filtering Bigevil from Chris, and makes it
> possible for local admins to "tune down" certain domains.
>
> Maybeevil should also be a lot smaller than Bigevil and therefore easier
> to double-check and edit locally.
>
> The META rule requires both to hit so that, if a domain drops out of
> Bigevil but not out of (the perhaps locally edited) Maybeevil, it doesn't
> get an unwarranted positive score.
Sounds like an ok idea..
One other thing I thought of last night after Jennifer's email saying to
break it into 2 lists & how much time Chris is spending maintaining the
list.. Why not distribute the list in plain text and put a script together
that people use to create the .cf file?
This would make adding and removing domains much easier, and would mean that
some less experienced users could benefit from the smarts of the ".cf
generator" script by adding and removing their own rules, which is actually
how we run some of our rulesets here.
In my mind this would potentially make maintenance easier and would make the
maintenance of multiple lists (maybeevil and bigevil) much simpler..
Just an idea.
Dave
========================================================================
Pain free spam & virus protection by: www.mailsecurity.net.au
Forward undetected SPAM to: spam@mailsecurity.net.au
========================================================================
>
> > > 'Bigevil.cf' -- never once seen in ham.
> > > 'Maybeevil.cf' -- a small number of hits in ham
>
> Here's a suggestion:
>
> Rather than try to filter into two files, leave Bigevil as-is. Place
> questionable domains that appear in Bigevil into another file (I don't
> know that Maybeevil is the best name, but whatever). Use a META rule
> such that domains that get hit by *both* Bigevil and Maybeevil get a
> positive score added back, to offset the Bigevil negative.
>
> This removes the burden of filtering Bigevil from Chris, and makes it
> possible for local admins to "tune down" certain domains.
>
> Maybeevil should also be a lot smaller than Bigevil and therefore easier
> to double-check and edit locally.
>
> The META rule requires both to hit so that, if a domain drops out of
> Bigevil but not out of (the perhaps locally edited) Maybeevil, it doesn't
> get an unwarranted positive score.
Sounds like an ok idea..
One other thing I thought of last night after Jennifer's email saying to
break it into 2 lists & how much time Chris is spending maintaining the
list.. Why not distribute the list in plain text and put a script together
that people use to create the .cf file?
This would make adding and removing domains much easier, and would mean that
some less experienced users could benefit from the smarts of the ".cf
generator" script by adding and removing their own rules, which is actually
how we run some of our rulesets here.
In my mind this would potentially make maintenance easier and would make the
maintenance of multiple lists (maybeevil and bigevil) much simpler..
Just an idea.
Dave
========================================================================
Pain free spam & virus protection by: www.mailsecurity.net.au
Forward undetected SPAM to: spam@mailsecurity.net.au
========================================================================