|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > spamassassin-users archives|
On 10/22/2010 02:50 AM, Darxus@ChaosReigns.com wrote:
> Or falsely reporting legit mail servers as sending large quantities of spam
> in another attempt to cripple the usefulness of such a system.
> I'm also interested in more ideas on how spammers could game this system,
> and what could be done about it.
It is important to remember that SPAM is relative. It has to be
considered from the point of view of the recipient. In most cases, from
the point of view of the organization of the recipient. A message which
is considered as an interesting information by one recipient, can be
considered as importunate by another recipient. Therefore, an
universally valid SPAM ranking is not possible. Further, a SPAM ranking
is evolving constantly.
In my eyes, a good SPAM processing system should include a comprehensive
abstract of the result of the analysis in the headers of the message so
that the recipient can be able to decide further using personal filters