Sorry for quoting myself, just elaborating some more...

On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 02:52 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 20:00 -0400, Juan Miscaro wrote:
> > Hi, I recently activated URIDNSBL and my scores went through the roof.

> You mean you activated the plugin? What's your SA version? These checks
> are enabled by default and actually are quite effective. As you noticed.
> And as the plugin doc [1] states.

Literally, btw.

> > I'm a little worried about it.

> Don't.
> Seriously, I know that feeling -- changing your mail processing
> "slightly", and noticing some massive changes. However...

I was referring to things like these -- neither have been major changes
to SA, but just some additional love or better evaluation of SAs answer
to the spam.

(a) Enabling some additional plugins, giving moderate scores. May easily
turn out to help a lot of spam jump the barrier of "dumping" somewhere

(b) Adding a bunch of custom, funky procmail receipts, investigating the
triggered rules. Even with a safety net of constraints like high Bayes
scores, at least one of a few carefully chosen blacklists and a total
score of above 16, I currently merely *log* the headers of about 96% of
my spam. Throwing away hundreds of MByte per month of useless payload
for a single user...

(c) Coming up with a new rule, that triggers on 30%+ of my low scoring
spam (aka <10).


char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu\0.@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a \x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i (c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}