[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       spamassassin-users
Subject:    Re: Registrar RBL: nomination and scoring
From:       "John D. Hardin" <jhardin () impsec ! org>
Date:       2006-08-13 22:30:54
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.10.10608131526440.16649-100000 () gypsy ! impsec ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006, John Rudd wrote:

> I like the idea of an RBL gives ratings instead of binary values.  
> That's why I thought of it being a "confidence percentage" instead
> of just a "yes, we have them listed in the zone".  How to build
> that confidence rating is another matter entirely.

There's another option: develop a set of registrar behavior criteria
(e.g. "does not have a strong anti-spam AUP", "does not respond to
complaints", "does not enforce AUP", etc.) and assign bits to those
criteria. There wouldn't be a confidence score per se, but a bitmapped
report of why they are considered spam-friendly. If you don't want to
judge on a particular criteria, mask it out of your subtest.

It's also much less subjective.

--
 John Hardin KA7OHZ    ICQ#15735746    http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
 jhardin@impsec.org    FALaholic #11174    pgpk -a jhardin@impsec.org
 key: 0xB8732E79 - 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C  AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  The fetters imposed on liberty at home have ever been forged out
  of the weapons provided for defense against real, pretended, or
  imaginary dangers from abroad.               -- James Madison, 1799
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]