Sent mail as ham?

[Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>]

Should we consider all mail in the "Sent" box as legitimate ham to feed 
into the masscheck?

Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com

Re: Sent mail as ham?

["J.D. Falk" <jd...@cybernothing.org>]

Matt Kettler wrote:

> Warren Togami wrote:
>> Should we consider all mail in the "Sent" box as legitimate ham to
>> feed into the masscheck?
  [ . . . ]
> It's not going to have a normal set of headers on it, ie: it's unlikely
> to contain any Received: headers, so I don't think that's good masscheck
> fodder.
>
> You might be able to use it for bayes training, but even that's a little
> sketchy.

My sent mail includes a lot of spam reports, so I'd have to keep this turned 
off.

Grabbing to/cc addresses from outgoing mail for personal auto-whitelisting 
is popular with webmail providers, and might work here....

-- 
J.D. Falk
Return Path Inc
http://www.returnpath.net/

Re: Sent mail as ham?

[Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>]

Warren Togami wrote:
> Should we consider all mail in the "Sent" box as legitimate ham to
> feed into the masscheck?
>
> Warren Togami
> wtogami@redhat.com
>
>
It's not going to have a normal set of headers on it, ie: it's unlikely
to contain any Received: headers, so I don't think that's good masscheck
fodder.

You might be able to use it for bayes training, but even that's a little
sketchy.