Duplicates in 70_sare_ratware.cf and 70_sare_header0.cf?

["Overdijk, Harrie" <ov...@ecn.nl>]

Dear Bob,

While were at it, could you have a look at 70_sare_ratware.cf and
70_sare_header.cf?
I have got the feeling that some (all?) Ratware checks are duplicated in
both rules.
If it is, the 70_sare_ratware.cf set should disappear from the SARE site
(and RDJ).
It is confusing and not a good idea to have double hits...

Thanks for the URI Rule, I'm gonna try it!

Cheers,
       Harrie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Menschel [mailto:Robert@Menschel.net]
> Sent: dinsdag 14 september 2004 6:47
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Cc: rulesemporium-l@nxtek.net
> Subject: [SARE] New URI Rule Set
> 
> 
> Just a quick announcement that SARE has published a new rule 
> set, aimed
> at identify spam by signs found within URI links.
> 
> Information at http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules.htm#uri
> 
> File at http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_uri.cf
> 
> I'd appreciate it if someone who uses RDJ and/or is more 
> familiar with it
> than I am check to see whether I fouled up the RDJ code, and fix it if
> need be.  Thanks.
> 
> Bob Menschel
> 
> 
> 

Re: [SARE] ratware -- was Duplicates in 70_sare_ratware.cf and 70_sare_header0.cf?

[jdow <jd...@earthlink.net>]

From: "Robert Menschel" <Ro...@Menschel.net>

> Tuesday, September 14, 2004, 6:07:32 AM, I wrote:
> 
> OH>> While were at it, could you have a look at 70_sare_ratware.cf and
> OH>> 70_sare_header.cf? I have got the feeling that some (all?) Ratware
> OH>> checks are duplicated in both rules. If it is, the
> OH>> 70_sare_ratware.cf set should disappear from the SARE site (and
> OH>> RDJ). It is confusing and not a good idea to have double hits...
> 
> RM> Agreed. I thought that had already been done.  Will be done by
> RM> tonight.
> 
> Done.  However, that shrank 70_sare_ratware.cf to two URI rules, which
> can go into the new URI rule set.
> 
> These will be migrated before the end of the month, and
> 70_sare_ratware.cf will go empty (to avoid RDJ failures), and then will
> be deleted some time next month.
> 
> Bob Menschel

I'll miss it. Ratware is such a picturesque and fun name considered
to "Uri". The latter sounds like making liquid waste.

{^_-}

[SARE] ratware -- was Duplicates in 70_sare_ratware.cf and 70_sare_header0.cf?

[Robert Menschel <Ro...@Menschel.net>]

Tuesday, September 14, 2004, 6:07:32 AM, I wrote:

OH>> While were at it, could you have a look at 70_sare_ratware.cf and
OH>> 70_sare_header.cf? I have got the feeling that some (all?) Ratware
OH>> checks are duplicated in both rules. If it is, the
OH>> 70_sare_ratware.cf set should disappear from the SARE site (and
OH>> RDJ). It is confusing and not a good idea to have double hits...

RM> Agreed. I thought that had already been done.  Will be done by
RM> tonight.

Done.  However, that shrank 70_sare_ratware.cf to two URI rules, which
can go into the new URI rule set.

These will be migrated before the end of the month, and
70_sare_ratware.cf will go empty (to avoid RDJ failures), and then will
be deleted some time next month.

Bob Menschel

Re: Duplicates in 70_sare_ratware.cf and 70_sare_header0.cf?

[Robert Menschel <Ro...@Menschel.net>]

Hello Harrie,

Tuesday, September 14, 2004, 12:48:32 AM, you wrote:

OH> While were at it, could you have a look at 70_sare_ratware.cf and
OH> 70_sare_header.cf? I have got the feeling that some (all?) Ratware
OH> checks are duplicated in both rules. If it is, the 70_sare_ratware.cf
OH> set should disappear from the SARE site (and RDJ). It is confusing
OH> and not a good idea to have double hits...

Agreed. I thought that had already been done.  Will be done by tonight.

OH> Thanks for the URI Rule, I'm gonna try it!

You're welcome.

Bob Menschel