This is a discussion on Message-ID:Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:In-Reply-To; b=pJPz6/cr+GOep+Fvvfy1+Ecvcv4ShjYhPEZWs62K5teYrlNFIL5ddgT/yj9iFPtgd9zJ/ye2vMg8Fn78KtUafG9Qz5zE/C1AkB3QAN4i2cf8OaDUOOzvH/llgVDzOCn0O5t5nmWEi6dBBZ3m324PW4yspE5BJHtIJzibvr+e bhU= - SpamAssassin ; On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:18:29AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > > On 23.10.08 20:05, Henrik K wrote: > > Lets get some facts straight. > > > > If you are not certain what you are ...
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:18:29AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 23.10.08 20:05, Henrik K wrote:
> > Lets get some facts straight.
> > If you are not certain what you are shortcicuiting, don't do it. But you
> > don't need to have performance issues to do it! I like to save resources for
> > a bad day (spam flood?).
> > I shortcircuit:
> > USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST
> > USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST
> > USER_IN_WHITELIST
> > Why bother scanning?
> because his computer may be infectedby some spam sending malware?
And this 1/1000 chance makes one bother wasting time on SA? Not me.
Remember that there is also ClamAV/Sanesecurity et al.
> > Also:
> > ALL_TRUSTED
> trusted hosts may relay spam...
Good luck to your paranoid world, I rather live in the real one.
Somehow some people think that having few FNs is the end of the world. It
doesn't make sense to multiply your resource usage to increase hit ratio