At 3:53 AM +0200 2003/08/13, Brad Knowles wrote:
0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0.500 0.11 0.00 RCVD_IN_MAPS_RSS
0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0.500 0.11 0.00 RCVD_IN_MAPS_RBL
0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0.500 0.11 0.00 RCVD_IN_MAPS_NML
0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0.500 0.11 0.00 RCVD_IN_MAPS_DUL
Thinking about this some more, I notice that the MAPS black lists
do not appear to be tested at all. For the sake of comparison, I
believe that they should be included in the tests and ranked against
the other black lists, or they should be omitted from the list of
black lists altogether.
Moreover, this is less than forty black lists. My understanding
is that there are well over a hundred in existence. This list would
need to be significantly expanded, in order to cover all known black
lists and be a more fair comparison.
I wonder -- have you run this comparison with other spam/ham
corpii? Do you continue to expand your spam/ham corpus as time goes
on?
--
Brad Knowles, <brad(_dot_)knowles(_at_)skynet(_dot_)be>
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.
GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+
!w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg