From: /dev/rob0 (rob0gmx.co.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 21 2005 - 14:49:30 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Monday 2005-November-21 11:15, L. Mark Stone wrote:
> Our experience has been that the effectiveness of various RBLs
> changes from month to month; what was an optimal set of RBLs two
> months ago may be less than optimal now. I did mention that we are

Agreed. This is not a "check the archives, dunderhead" matter. It's OT
as noted, but otherwise a quite valid question. You might want to join
SPAM-L <SPAM-Lpeach.ease.lsoft.com> to find a more topical forum for
these discussions. There's also NANAE, if you prefer Usenet.

> Do you care to offer the RBLs that you are using on your system?

combined.njabl.org and list.dsbl.org are good, and were not in your
list. I'd be shy of using SORBS as a reject_rbl_client, but it can be
useful in a scoring system, such as http://www.policyd-weight.org/ .

I catch a few spams with reject_rhsbl_sender blackhole.securitysage.com
and rhsbl.ahbl.org. Both seem to be well and conscientiously managed; I
have seen removals from each, when I saw a questionable listing on AHBL
and a false positive on SecuritySage.

I use bl.spamcop.net with rbl_reply_maps, which returns a 454. Spamcop
will indeed have false positives (or collateral damage which feels
similar), but IIUC their listings normally time out after 8 hours. In
that time a spammer might get listed on other lists, and real mail
might get through. That is the theory, anyway. I've seen plenty of
Spamcop deferrals and have not yet gotten a complaint of missing mail.

I am testing ubl.unsubscore.com, but have not yet checked on how it's
doing.
--
    mail to this address is discarded unless "/dev/rob0"
    or "not-spam" is in Subject: header

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]