On 10/07/2023 20:01, Slavko via mailop wrote:
Sources are on github, any one can see that. It adds 3,5 score by
default, while relative high, not significant itself and requires other
marks. 3,5 is not enough to mark message as SPAM even with
default thresholds, on my site 10 is required for that.
Actually, it adds 3.5 *by scope*. And it has 3 scopes: url, email and
dkim. Which eventually sum up to 10.5... You would reject our messages.
SEM_URIBL (7) [example.com:url,example.com:email]
SEM_URIBL (10.5) [example.com:url,example.com:email,example.com:dkim]
Anyway, if this RBL is really as bad, it is not worth to use it and
would be great to get evidence from others too.
Sure. I can't believe, like Jarland said, that SEM would tag domains so
simply!
By the way, as expected, we got listed again :-(
Some "evidences":
Received: from dltrngr.net ([240e:390:5d03:af1f:215:383:da23:52d])
by spameatingmonkey (spamtrap) with SMTP id
11AEBA66-904E-4BEB-A4AF-C03AF2E0B406.1
envelope-from <redacted>;
Tue, 11 Jul 2023 05:42:16 +0000
Received: from zqxd.com ([240e:390:5d03:978f:215:329:2a23:52d])
by spameatingmonkey (spamtrap) with SMTP id
22458D54-2F08-4D56-A805-4A5EBF576198.1
envelope-from <redacted>;
Tue, 11 Jul 2023 03:45:24 +0000
Received: from uveuqmfh.org ([240e:390:5d03:95cc:215:3bb:623:52d])
by spameatingmonkey (spamtrap) with SMTP id
AE4E9276-6718-4FDB-8CCB-C578F1F7F76A.1
envelope-from <redacted>;
Tue, 11 Jul 2023 02:13:54 +0000
If somebody from SEM is reading this, it would be easy for him/her to
find out the domain I'm talking about. And maybe help us to understand
what SEM is doing?
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
