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

Re: Sex spam again on the list

On 19-sep-2007, at 21:27, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:


On Tue Sep 18, 2007 at 08:36:30 +0200, Peter Teunissen wrote:
For directly blocking mail however, you'd be better of using the
zen.spamhaus.org combined blocklist wich is very effective and has almost no false positives. I don't know how they do it, but it catches 90% of my
spam on it's own. More info can be found on http://www.spamhaus.org

The proiblem of using RBLs on SMTP-time is that the mail is gone,
nevertheless it was UCE or not. This becomes even more problematic, as
postfix currently can't weight this information. The implementation of a
policy filter we are currently implementing for lists.d.o will do SA
like scoring of RBL data and us that information whether to greylist a
mail or not.

You're obviously right. I was merely responding to filtering personal mail and the (bad) use of spamcop.net to block mail, the subject this thread had swerved to. Risking to loose ham on a _non private_ server however is definitely not a good thing.


Peter Teunissen

-- Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music.
-Kristian Wilson, Nintendo Inc. 1989

Reply to: