Henrik K wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 10:48:07AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 03.07.08 11:35, Henrik K wrote:
I'd like to encourage people to take more advantage of DNSWL.
I'm currently converting DNSWL entries into trusted_networks and using
shortcircuited ALL_TR
> [snip code + explanation]
Very nice :)
> It would be nice to see something like this built into SA in the future,
> possibly even distributing all the entries daily with sa-update.
We can produce almost any export format of dnswl.org data, also in a way
that it would fit for some sa-update cha
On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 10:48 +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 03.07.08 11:35, Henrik K wrote:
> > I'd like to encourage people to take more advantage of DNSWL.
>
> while DNSWL('s) may be good, I encountered many cases whan spam and bounces
> won't get catched by SA because the sender is i
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 10:48:07AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 03.07.08 11:35, Henrik K wrote:
> > I'd like to encourage people to take more advantage of DNSWL.
>
> while DNSWL('s) may be good, I encountered many cases whan spam and bounces
> won't get catched by SA because the sende
On 03.07.08 11:35, Henrik K wrote:
> I'd like to encourage people to take more advantage of DNSWL.
while DNSWL('s) may be good, I encountered many cases whan spam and bounces
won't get catched by SA because the sender is in DNSQL.
> I'm currently converting DNSWL entries into trusted_networks and
Hi,
I'd like to encourage people to take more advantage of DNSWL.
I'm currently converting DNSWL entries into trusted_networks and using
shortcircuited ALL_TRUSTED to reduce unnecessary processing. Also DNS checks
are reduced.
With only 'med' and 'high' entries, 15% of my traffic hits ALL_TRUST
