On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 07:25:31PM +0300, Sami Haahtinen wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 04:44:30PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > For the message I'm replying to, I get:
> > >
> > > X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=6.7 required=5.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,PLING,US_DOLLARS_3,US_DOLLARS,SUPERLONG_LINE,RCVD_IN_RFCI version=2.20
> > >
> > > which means we could eliminate even more spam if we used a more recent
> > > spamassassin version (for example, the one in woody).
> >
> > and enable razor support, which would eliminate even more spam.
>
> Razor has been known to catch things like Debian security advisories ...
> I'm not sure that using it on the Debian lists is a great idea.
> SpamAssassin is much less vulnerable to random people messing about with
> its idea of what is spam and what isn't.
Beeing listed in Razor gives 3.0 points. So beeing in razor itself would
not result in a message beeing rejected.
yours,
peter
--
PGP signed and encrypted | .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux **
messages preferred. | : :' : The universal
| `. `' Operating System
http://www.palfrader.org/ | `- http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
pgp2mGzqXf5Bo.pgp
Description: PGP signature