On 2019-12-20 15:11:25 +0100, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
I am very unclear on what you understand to be "deterministic".
Which reminds me of an argument I had back in the time when Spamcop was
a thing. For those of you don't remember them, they ran a blacklist
directly driven by user feedback. You could report spam and they would
analyze the Received headers to identify the real sender and add that to
their list. They would also notify the purported sender to give them a
chance to object.
This didn't always work perfectly, but the argument wasn't about that.
The argument was that using the recipient's opinion on whether a given
mail was spam or not spam was "subjective" and you shouldn't base
filters on that.
Instead you should use "objective" criteria like whether the sender had
a PTR record.
Well, that might be objective, but objective for what? There may or may
not be correlation between spam senders and missing PTR records. There
might even be a causal relationship. But that's hard to prove, and in
any case it's just a proxy. Because the end goal is reduce spam, not to
improve the coverage of PTR records.
_ | Peter J. Holzer | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) | |
| | | hjp(_at_)hjp(_dot_)at | -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | challenge!"
Description: PGP signature
ietf-smtp mailing list