Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
The result will be no URIBL only FPs. OTOH, you may end up with a
shit-ton of people bitching about spam accuracy dropping in stock 3.2
installs if you make these changes.
I'm not sure it'd be *that* bad.
A grep of my logs from this week shows that 1.1% of my spam scores under
a score of 8 and only 13% of those spams hit *any* URIBLs.
So yeah, there'd be more FNs, but I'm not sure that it'd a shit-ton of
them.
Daryl
It would, an imperial shit-ton. I would have clients backed up in the
queue before lunch the day I upgraded. That is assuming I didn't modify
the scores after the upgrade to put things back, which I would.
I would have had to replace my spamd server at least twice in the last
two years if it were not for URIBL. Prior to it's introduction I ran
approx (been a awhile, hard to remember) 25 to 45 sets of rules. I
checked my spam pots three times a week and spent 10 to 15 hours a week
writing custom rules. Now I kill score a URIBL and run just a few rules
as needed.
Yes, I kill messages with a single URIBL hit(not on grey). I rarely
check for FP any more, my clients will let me know immediately if there
is one. When there is an FP the clients just login to webmail, whitelist
the sender, problem solved.
Frank gets all the wildthangs.com mail he can handle due to his personal
whitelist entry, and Mable never has to deal with
partywithyourpantson.ru thanks to URIBL.
I find the discussion interesting from a technical standpoint. But I
don't see it as a unsurmountable issue. Juggle the scores in local.cf,
setup per user prefs, whitelist globally. Lots of solutions exist.
Just my two cents (if it is even worth that). I'll bow out to the
smarter types now.
DAve
