Re: More anti-spam tuning.

Greg Oster wrote:

>Collateral damage that's easy to fix by putting the gmail servers
>into the whitelist. (there should be a "table-whitelist.sql" file
>somewhere that has "Googlemail" entries, among others). Other good
>candidates for the whitelist are folks like BUGTRAQ, and anyone else
>who changes the "from=" address on a *per-message* basis.
>
>
I used a list from
http://cvs.puremagic.com/viewcvs/greylisting/schema/whitelist_ip.txt
I guess those google servers weren't on the list. I turned on
LIGHTGREY=1, which solved the gmail thing.

>I'll leave it to the stats experts out there to determine if this
>sample size is sufficient for drawing conclusions about the
>population characteristics ;)
>
>
I don't need to ask the stats guys to know that is too small a sample.
Still, it's rather dissapointing to see 22 out of 61 lines are _obvious_
spam that has passed the gld test. (Yes, the sample size has grown
since the last message.)

ttyl
srw
Received on Mon May 15 11:48:50 2006