[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: sorbs blacklisting scam

On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 12:21:13PM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 04:26:32PM +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 06:19:21PM +0200, Hans du Plooy wrote:
> > > Which RBLs would you recommend, should someone want to use it?
> > 
> > Of the SORBS ones I only use the DUL to reject at SMTP time.  Others
> > are used by SpamAssassin's scoring (whatever the default settings of
> > SA are).
> My colo box recently got caught by this, despite it being a blatently
> static range. It took SORBS 3 months to remove the range from the
> blacklist. I really don't reccomend it :)

I have to agree and recently changed my policies, as it was brought
to my attention that SORBS DUL will list IPs whose reverse DNS
states they are clearly not dynamic, simply because the TTL of the
PTR record is "too low".  If they want that to be their policy then
fine, but it's way too arbitrary for my liking..


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: