[milters] Archive

Lists Index Date Thread Search

Article: 1066
From: Taylor, Grant
Date: 2006-07-21 11:16:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Q: separate milter-link policy for +test-links?

Removal...........: milters-request@milter.info?subject=remove
More information..: http://www.milter.info/#Support
--------------------------------------------------------

Anthony Howe wrote:
> Daniel Krones has suggested to me that it might be better to have a 
> separate policy for +test-links disjoint from the URI BL policy. I'm 
> sort of on the fence with this one.

...

> So I'm looking for the opinion of milter-link users. Simplicity or 
> flexibility?

I like the idea that I can reject on black listed URLs and I also like the idea that I can
+test links.  I do not know if having a separate policy is the best solution or not.  What
I propose is more growing the existing policy.  (I'm going off of memory here so if I get
some details wrong please don't kill me.)  I would like to have something in between where
I can pass the message if the link is black listed but tag indicating that the +test
failed.  This way I can out and out reject known bad links while still +testing links to
find out if they go somewhere bad.  This way I can easily combine Milter-Link with
SpamAssassin rules to add a point value to the spam score if the +test fails.  This will
eventually allow my subjective tests to add up to a higher score thus helping separate the
spam from the ham.  This also allows me to discus a URL that would possibly fail the +test
via email passing through my server with a bit higher spam score verses being rejected out
right.  
I think this adds some "GREY" area to the filter, which in some cases does help.
 This way the "GREY" is passed on to S.A. where it can combine the score from
other tests to decide just how black or white the grey really is while taking in to
account user preferences as far as a spam_score.



Grant. . . .

Lists Index Date Thread Search