--On 1 October 2005 14:19:29 +0200 Leonardo Boselli <leo@???>
wrote:
> I do not thing thet whitelisting is good, there are a lot of viruses that
> come that way.
well, you don't want to avoid virus scanning, but if an email has no (or
only text) attachments, then avoiding spam scanning can still help.
> blacklisting is more effective, and han no false positive.
> even spamassassin has a whitelisting capability, and i use here.
> however the filter must be used by every single user, since there are
> many occasions where a source is considered spam by all but a few
> users.
>
> Il 1 Oct 2005 alle 11:10 Odhiambo G. Washington immise in rete
>> * On 30/09/05 19:21 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
>> > One of the things that is creating SA load is processing good email.
>> > I'm trying to figure out a way to bless stuff that I know is ham so
>> > I can bypass spam assassin. And it has to somehow just learn it
>> > automatically.
>> DSPAM has that idea already and does whitelist senders. Perhaps you
>> can consider running DSPAM and SpamAssassin together. However, the
>> only instances I have seen that done are where the admins use SA
>> results to train DSPAM.
>> I'd say this: DSPAM has no load at all, if load is your concern, so
>> think about embracing it.
> --
> Leonardo Boselli
> Nucleo Informatico e Telematico del Dipartimento Ingegneria Civile
> Universita` di Firenze , V. S. Marta 3 - I-50139 Firenze
> tel +39 0554796431 cell +39 3488605348 fax +39 055495333
> http://www.dicea.unifi.it/~leo
--
Ian Eiloart
Servers Team
Sussex University ITS
