[bogofilter] Re: [bogofilter] Test sets, accuracy and other things

[Ben Rosengart]

On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 03:25:36PM +0100, Jonathan Buzzard wrote:
> 
> What relevance does this have to bogofilter you might ask? Well apart from
> the 68 virus I only had another 11 emails with attachements. Now if
> bogofilter returned a different exit code for emails that although not
> spam contained a MIME attachment I could restrict the scanning for virus
> to those 6.5% of emails that could possibly contain a virus. As bogofilter
> is scanning all the emails in the first place and already does 99% of the
> work required to return that different status code, this would lead to
> a dramatic saving of processing power if you are scanning for viruses
> as well as spam. I did previously propose to Eric that bogofilter did
> the actual scanning based on the above rules which he rightly rejected.
> However I think my modified proposal is perfectly acceptable and a
> justified extension of bogofilter. What do you all think?

The return code is a narrow channel for communication.  Most
spam-filtering software that doesn't make a final disposition
of email communicates with other programs by inserting headers.

-- 
Ben Rosengart     (212) 741-4400 x215

Microsoft has argued that open source is bad for business, but you
have to ask, "Whose business?  Theirs, or yours?"    --Tim O'Reilly