On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 07:45:02PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > Mathieu Roy wrote: > > But I definitely find spamassassin conceptually much better - because > > it really takes a mail for what it is. It cannot be trapped. > > Because if the DNSBL one day become a major problem to spammers, who > > knows what kind of methods they may use to attack them. > > A spamassassin rule is much easier to fool than an IP address. > Not a long time ago there were a lot of spam which was "PGP-signed". FWIW, the next version of spamassassin (2.60) will have no forgeable negatively scoring rules. (ETA early-mid July) -- Duncan Findlay
Attachment:
pgpMTeoBWjc3b.pgp
Description: PGP signature