4 Aug
2004
4 Aug
'04
3:13 p.m.
On Wednesday, August 4, 2004, 7:53:02 AM, Chris Santerre wrote:
What was the final say on this?
The particular data source we looked at seemed to have too many false positives. Maybe there are some data sources we could check.
Also there's some dilution of focus and potential for misapplication since such a list probably would have non-spammers on it. Someone who blindly plugged in such a list along with other spam-oriented SURBLs would probably get some false positives in terms of non-spam messages getting hits, compared to the existing purely spam SURBLs.
So while it's an interesting idea, there were a few classes of potential problems with it the last time we looked.
Jeff C.