Chuq Von Rospach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Interesting timing....
> <http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-2086887.html?tag=st.ne.1002.tgif.ni>
> The fact that the test was run by the group that came out on top makes
> me immediately wonder, but...
Brightmail is odd. I've never gotten a particularly good vibe from them.
I'm in general very leery of commercial filtering services because in
order to compete commercially they're pretty much out of necessity keeping
their precise techniques secret, and that opens up more false positive
risks and other related problems than I'd be comfortable with.
Say what you want about MAPS, RSS, or even ORBS, at least they make very
public exactly who they're blocking and for the most part why. I can go
look at their databases and figure out whether or not a mail message would
be blocked.
They're also, from that article, again missing the point of the RBL. It
would have been interesting to see RSS on that list, or ORBS, and it would
also have been interesting to find out how they were generating the spam.
Were they using real spam, or where they inventing it?
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
