From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GhrLD-0002ZA-Dy for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:35:59 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id kA8HYINW015919; Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:34:18 GMT Received: from panther.panther.lieber.org (mail.lieber.org [64.147.188.100]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kA8HUBD8002535 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:30:11 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by panther.panther.lieber.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C70F8E84021 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:30:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at lieber.org X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from panther.panther.lieber.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (panther.lieber.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PftQrsjwlvJW for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:29:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by panther.panther.lieber.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 48A33E84022; Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:29:55 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:29:55 +0000 From: Kurt Lieber To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for November Message-ID: <20061108172955.GY4007@mail.lieber.org> References: <20061101134037.6F126649AC@smtp.gentoo.org> <200611061720.50442.vapier@gentoo.org> <20061106223839.GA6332@gentoo.org> <200611061748.34810.vapier@gentoo.org> <45502DEB.20404@gentoo.org> <20061107162459.j8akeyhf0gwg88os@horde.gg3.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="MT9SxUWSsctiw0kG" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061107162459.j8akeyhf0gwg88os@horde.gg3.net> X-GPG-Key: http://www.lieber.org/kurtl.pub.gpg User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: 891d598f-fe3d-4207-8c5a-3fa40eb173db X-Archives-Hash: a8f7306d856b7aa16611bbabf391e703 --MT9SxUWSsctiw0kG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 04:24:59PM +0900 or thereabouts, Georgi Georgiev wr= ote: > I ain't no dev, but how is this trivial? A typical scenario is: a =20 > gentoo-dev sends an e-mail to a mailing list (a non-gentoo mailing =20 > list) and that mail gets nuked by a greedy spam filter because the SPF = =20 > rules exclude (oh well, "do not specifically include") the server that = =20 > forwards the mailing list message. I'm not trying to pick on Georgi, but can we please be realistic about the true impact of this? So far, we've identified one application (SpamAssassin) that incorrectly interprets a neutral SPF record. As a result, it adds 1.1 to the overall SA score. Different people have different thresholds for spam filtering, surely, but nobody in their right mind is going to start dropping mails with a positive score of 1.1. The default out of the box is (I think) 5.5. So the message is still marked as 80% clean. Even if you want to be ultra aggressive and drop mail based on a score in the 3-ish range, this SPF issue still won't even get the message a third of the way towards hitting that threshold. --kurt --MT9SxUWSsctiw0kG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFUhQTJPpRNiftIEYRAtqHAJ4667afV5m1zvVDbKqnXdK+GP1ZCQCdHIwv KbtttfAG7FyO7PvTSKLvSiM= =NN2j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --MT9SxUWSsctiw0kG-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list