Marc Perkel a écrit :
> http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
>
> It appears from Jeff's Blacklists Compared list the Barracuda has
> overtaken spamhaus for the #1 position. Not sure about the accuracy of
> the list as compared to spamhaus but seams reasonably good to me. I
> don't really count apews myself since they are extremely bad, but my
> hostkarma list is next beating out abuseat, sorbs, and uceprotect.
>
> Thanks to everyone who is helping me with my tarbaby project to catch
> virus bots.
>
> http://wiki.junkemailfilter.com/index.php/Project_tarbaby
>
> Congrats to Barracuda!
>
>
>
The deadly difference is: trust. I have never noticed a zen FP. I have
found barracuda FPs few days after I started testing it. and the first
FP I found suggests they use(d?) some automatic filter-then-list
procedure, which is a fundamentally borked approach: the host in
question does relay spam, because it is a forwarder, that recipients
(such as myself) chose to use. so listing it based on content filtering
or on stupid user "hit this is spam button" may be good for a score
based filtering strategy, but isn't good for smtp time rejection.
in short, whatever jeff says, spamhaus is the one. the fundamental
concept is not "how many spam it blocks", but "how much do I trust it".
note that since few days,
reject_non_fqdn_sender
rejects a lot of transactions (and shows many bot-clients to block).
