Hi,
> Independent testing like the VB tests tell me much more.
>
> http://www.virusbtn.com/virusbulletin/archive/2010/03/vb201003-vbspam-comparative
>
> And yes that more or less the commercial products, but it shows also how
> lits like SURBL perform. But also ratings of the large vendors. And th
On Apr 7, 2010, at 4:15 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
> he doesn't take FPs into account. this is a very serious problem with
> the methodology.
+1
--
J.D. Falk
Return Path Inc
On 4/7/2010 7:41 AM, corpus.defero wrote:
On Wed, 2010-04-07 at 15:14 +0200, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
Hi!
http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
It seems barracuda is still leading, but is that also everyone's
experience? Can anyone provide details on how Jeff
Alex wrote on Tue, 6 Apr 2010 22:41:18 -0400:
> > http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
This list is not useable for choosing your preferred RBL. It doesn't take
false positives into account. apews.org for instance is not usable at all
and sorbs is only usable when you exclude their spamtraps
On Wed, 2010-04-07 at 15:14 +0200, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
> Hi!
>
> >>> http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
>
> >> It seems barracuda is still leading, but is that also everyone's
> >> experience? Can anyone provide details on how Jeff computed this
> >> information and is it as cut-and-dr
Hi!
Setup a blacklist blocking ANY ip and you are ranked #1 in this test.
Its of no use at all IMHO.
Yes, certainly, and I guess it was a loaded question of me to ask,
because it was almost too obvious that I thought I was missing
something. I don't think it's _completely_ useless though, bec
Hi,
http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
[...]
> Setup a blacklist blocking ANY ip and you are ranked #1 in this test.
> Its of no use at all IMHO.
Yes, certainly, and I guess it was a loaded question of me to ask,
because it was almost too obvious that I thought I was missing
something.
Hi!
http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
It seems barracuda is still leading, but is that also everyone's
experience? Can anyone provide details on how Jeff computed this
information and is it as cut-and-dried as this makes it seem? IOW,
barracuda, the free service, is "better" than all th
On Wednesday, 7 of April 2010, Marc Perkel wrote:
> Here's another good list that rates quality.
>
> http://www.intra2net.com/en/support/antispam/index.php
The methodology behind this rating is kinda peculiar.
What good is counting messages hit by lists? If I make a DNSBL which just
marks gmail
* Ned Slider :
> Last year when the barracuda config was first posted to this list, I
> implemented it on my personal mail server with a very high score so
> as to trigger automatic quarantines for all mail hitting the list,
> and have since checked all hits by hand. I currently use zen.spamhaus
>
On 07/04/2010 12:01, corpus.defero wrote:
During the last year I don't think I've seen a single FP hit against
barracuda :surprised: That said, I still haven't found the confidence to
implement it at the smtp stage for outright rejection but the numbers
I'm seeing do tend towards telling me the
On Wed, 2010-04-07 at 11:38 +0100, Ned Slider wrote:
> Alex wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Last October Marc posted the following URL that compared the various RBLs:
> >
> >> http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
> >
> > It seems barracuda is still leading, but is that also everyone's
> > experience?
Alex wrote:
Hi,
Last October Marc posted the following URL that compared the various RBLs:
http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
It seems barracuda is still leading, but is that also everyone's
experience? Can anyone provide details on how Jeff computed this
information and is it as cut-an
he doesn't take FPs into account. this is a very serious problem with
the methodology.
--j.
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 03:41, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Last October Marc posted the following URL that compared the various RBLs:
>
>> http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
>
> It seems barracuda is still
Here's another good list that rates quality.
http://www.intra2net.com/en/support/antispam/index.php
On 4/6/2010 7:41 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
Last October Marc posted the following URL that compared the various RBLs:
http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
It seems barracuda is still l
On 4/6/2010 7:41 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
Last October Marc posted the following URL that compared the various RBLs:
http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
It seems barracuda is still leading, but is that also everyone's
experience? Can anyone provide details on how Jeff computed this
Hi,
Last October Marc posted the following URL that compared the various RBLs:
> http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
It seems barracuda is still leading, but is that also everyone's
experience? Can anyone provide details on how Jeff computed this
information and is it as cut-and-dried as thi
http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
The races!
Big upset for Baracudda as Spamhaus takes back the #1 position and Spam
Eating Monkey comes in second. (I don't count apews) Hostkarma pulls
ahead of Uceprotect who have been running neck and neck for 5th and 6th
place.
18 matches
Mail list logo
