From spamassassin-talk-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Thu Aug 29 11:05:54 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.netnoteinc.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C6EA44162 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 06:04:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phobos [127.0.0.1] by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0) for jm@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:04:47 +0100 (IST) Received: from usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net (usw-sf-fw2.sourceforge.net [216.136.171.252]) by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7SKURZ09244 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 21:30:27 +0100 Received: from usw-sf-list1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.13] helo=usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net) by usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17k9R2-000138-00; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 13:29:04 -0700 Received: from yrex.com ([216.40.247.31] helo=host.yrex.com) by usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with smtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17k9QQ-0002eH-00 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 13:28:26 -0700 Received: (qmail 14249 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2002 20:28:21 -0000 Received: from mgm.dsl.xmission.com (HELO opus) (204.228.152.186) by yrex.com with SMTP; 28 Aug 2002 20:28:21 -0000 From: "Michael Moncur" To: Subject: RE: [SAtalk] O.T. Habeus -- Why? Message-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <1030560510.17408.TMDA@omega.paradigm-omega.net> X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: spamassassin-talk-admin@example.sourceforge.net Errors-To: spamassassin-talk-admin@example.sourceforge.net X-Beenthere: spamassassin-talk@example.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9-sf.net Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Talk about SpamAssassin List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 14:28:16 -0600 Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 14:28:16 -0600 X-Pyzor: Reported 0 times. X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.2 required=7.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, SPAM_PHRASE_03_05,USER_AGENT_OUTLOOK version=2.40-cvs X-Spam-Level: > I may be dense, but why would anyone want to utilize Habeus? To > me, it looks like a potential backdoor to anyone's defenses against spam. You're not dense. I'm going to zero the habeas scores on my copy of SpamAssassin. I think they were added to SA quite prematurely. To me it's simple: 1. People who send me legitimate email have absolutely no motivation to use Habeas, at least until it gets lots more press, and even then only bulk-mailing companies like Amazon or eBay are going to bother, and I already whitelist them. Individuals won't bother. 2. Spammers have lots of motivation to forge the Habeas headers, and a good percentage of them are completely out of the legal reach of Habeas. I think it should be subjected to the same testing and scrutiny as any other potential new rule. When I test against my corpus here's what I get: OVERALL SPAM NONSPAM S/O SCORE NAME 13851 8919 4932 0.64 0.00 (all messages) 0 0 0 0.00 -1.00 HABEAS_SWE The score of -1.0 is pretty harmless right now, but it still looks like a useless rule so far. -- Michael Moncur mgm at starlingtech.com http://www.starlingtech.com/ "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." --Napoleon ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: Jabber - The world's fastest growing real-time communications platform! Don't just IM. Build it in! http://www.jabber.com/osdn/xim _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list Spamassassin-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk