Spamassassin slows things down like mad!
Paul Jakma
paul at dishone.st
Fri Sep 2 13:38:08 UTC 2005
On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, Patrick wrote:
> but I haven't seen anything surface. Imho at the end of the day you
> are far better of with postfix with some good rules which will stop
> a ton of spam attempts and then add a drop of dspam to kill the
'spamprobe' is also really good. A standalone bayesian filter. See:
http://spamprobe.sf.net
IMHO, Bayesian filtering is far more effective at catching spam than
static rules (SA uses both). Also, I run 'rbl-milter' to add
X-RBL-Milter headers based on DNSBls and I have spamprobe configured
to consider these headers. Which is rather better than configuring
your MTA to reject DNSBl'd mail, cause you don't have to worry about
effectiveness of a DNSBl, particularly overbearing ones - instead
spamprobe will 'learn' how effective different DNSBl's are for you.
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul at clubi.ie paul at jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it's still a foolish thing.
-- Bertrand Russell
More information about the fedora-test-list
mailing list