RE: Further on FORGED_MUA_MOSILLA, was: Further on DNS_FROM_RFC_*

[Michael Scheidell <sc...@secnap.net>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kurt Fitzner [mailto:kfitzner@excelcia.org] 
> Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2006 5:57 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Further on DNS_FROM_RFC_*
> 
> 
> I just received some email from Spamcop, and thought to check 
> the spamassassin scores on it:
> 
> No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00=-2.599,	
>   DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME=0.001,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE=0.2,	
>   FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA=1.593,SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no version=3.1.7
> 
> I was quite amused to see the DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE score there, 
> on a message from spamcop.  I would suggest that if a major 
> spam player like spamcop doesn't accept abuse@ emails, then 
> it's further indication that perhaps the test isn't terribly 
> useful as a determination of whether the email is/isn't spam.
> 

Just what does a .2 score do to the above? NOTHING.
Why not bitch about 'forged_mua_mozilla'? That appears to be a bigger
problem. :-)
Obviously if spamcop can't create a correcly formated email, follow the
rfc's, then lets just take out all the checks? Right?

IF YOU SET ALL THE RFC_ SCORES TO 0, YOU WILL SLEEP BETTER AT NIGHT.