Re: SA 3.01 scoring very low

[Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Sean Doherty writes:
> On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 15:04, Dave Goodrich wrote: 
> > > Check out trusted_network section of Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf
> > > i.e no RBL tests on trusted networks.
> > "If you're running with DNS checks enabled, SpamAssassin includes code 
> > to infer your trusted networks on the fly, so this may not be necessary. 
> > (Thanks to Scott Banister and Andrew Flury for the inspiration for this 
> > algorithm.) This inference works as follows:"
> > 
> > This seems backwards to me. If a user does nothing, then his network 
> > will be considered trusted by default? We are an ISP, and SA is running 
> > on our toasters. I don't want any machine trusted as that leaves a door 
> > open for my smtp relay users (viruses, trojans, just bad folks) to spam 
> > local users.
> > 
> > JMHO, but shouldn't all networks be considered untrusted unless a user 
> > specifies otherwise?
> 
> I got to agree with you there - especially given that the inference
> algorithm doesn't work in every environment.

the idea is that an ISP *will* take the time to set that setting. ;)

- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS

iD4DBQFBimZxMJF5cimLx9ARAm7VAJdjojaKXz6t++f5BwK+ocf0jT5cAKChSgLF
7Wrsz2oohTyTjYLaJktIuA==
=LLyQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----