Fritz Borgstedt wrote: > GrayHat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreibt: > >> I think that setting up an >> "AggressiveDNSBL" entry may be of help; I mean; conservative >> DNSBLs entered in the existing "RBLserviceprovider" will still >> act as they do now; while the additional entries will have an option >> to set them up as "disabled/monitor/score" (no "block" option) >> so that one will still be able to use over-aggressive lists setting >> them up so that they'll just "flag" incoming messages >> > > Ok. What should we do, if AggressiveDNSBL scores? > Skip the the standard DNSBL test when it is set to scoring? > Or accept that scoring is done twice for DNSBL? > In the model we're discussing, where some DNSBL's are more aggressive than others, and we're concerned about false positives, I would say the goal would be an independent score for aggressive hits. So the standard DNSBL test is still performed in scoring mode, but we need a new scoring parameter to support this test. If I understand the objective of this discussion, it's to allow conservative DNSBL's to have high scores or instant blocking, while more aggressive DNSBL's are still checked but with lower scores. So separate scoring values would be required.
Under the model I've described, both DNSBL tests need to be performed, as one test might only score, while the other will either block or add significantly to the score. For this reason also, the standard test should come first as it may result in a block. -- Daniel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Assp-test mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
