RBL's are still better than SA or other filters... Why? Because properly selected RBL's (ie. Deterministic, easy to get off of) actually allow you to block based on a PROBLEM! RBL's that you want to use are Open Relay black lists and Dialup server blacklists. These are PROBLEMS to be FIXED. They aren't attempting to look for the appropriate number of "Free" and "XXX" in the email, which could be used in real life email.
I have been blocked before. I used to administer a GroupWise system that was difficult to lock down. This was before I learned about RBL's. They rightfully flagged my server as an Open Relay (anyone can send email to anywhere/anyone) and when I checked the server, we had a HUGE backlog of emails which the spammers had sent to anyone and everyone. We got the server configured correctly and then got off the RBL. It was inconvenient, but RBL's are a real part of a good strategy against SPAM, and will be around for as long as SPAM is around. And this is why. On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 14:09:31 -0400 Tim Wunder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When our ISP blocked mail intended for my company (we're a small > company, don't want to administer a mail server locally) based on RBL's, > I pitched a major fit with them. We're a business, we don't want ANY > mail blocked. They were pretty good at determining what to block, about > 95% right, but it was the 5% of legitimate mails that they blocked that > caused considerable problems. > They now use SpamAssassin and spam gets marked, but delivered. Much > better for our end users. Some legit mail gets a SAPM tag, and some spam > goes un-tagged, but it's much more managable for our users. (FWIW) -- Matthew Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.eisgr.com/ Enterprise Information Systems * Network Service Appliances * Network Consulting, Integration & Support * Web Integration and E-Business _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
