[SURBL-Discuss] RFC: consensus list?

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Sat Nov 13 08:46:06 CET 2004

On Friday, November 12, 2004, 7:07:29 AM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
> See Ryan's answer, it's easy to do interesting stuff
> with the multi bits, multi was a good idea.  If you
> want to simplify it set bit 1 if 3 or more other bits
> are set, examples:   =>>   (2 or less bits unchanged) =>> (64+32+4 => 64+32+4+1)  =>>  (8+4+2 => 8+4+2+1)

LOL!  I didn't think of that!  If you take multi and feed it into
urirhsbl or the non-bitmasked version of SpamCopURI and use
numerical values like:

Then you can find URIs that appear on JP, AB and WS, etc.


2 = comes from sc.surbl.org
4 = comes from ws.surbl.org
8 = comes from phishing data source (labelled as [ph] in multi)
16 = comes from ob.surbl.org
32 = comes from ab.surbl.org
64 = comes from jp data source (labelled as [jp] in multi)

So simple "and" combinations like this can already be done and
tested without explicitly creating new, combined lists.

SC + AB + WS + OB + JP would be
SC + WS + OB + JP      would be
SC + OB + JP           would be

etc.  Would someone care to run some of these combinations
through their corpus tests?

Jeff C.
"If it appears in hams, then don't list it."

More information about the Discuss mailing list