On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 03:36:53PM -0500, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote: > On 02/16, Kris Deugau wrote: > > Marc Perkel wrote: > >> ... Since your idea also > >> requires blacklists to counter this effect then I'm still not sure what > >> this adds. > > > > *nod* This is the biggest question I still see remaining; who > > maintains the blacklist? How many spams can come from an "MTX-approved" > > IP before it can/should be blacklisted? > > Because I believe it will be far easier to maintain a list of IPs and / or > domains which spam *and* use MTX, due to significant reduction in IPs they > can spam from. My last post went into more detail.
You keep "believing" without actually ever explaining anything in detail. How is it easier? You STILL need global traps/feeds to have reasonable data and reputation. Are you going to be the maintainer? I don't see how MTX would help for example Spamhaus. They list everything anyway and it works fine. Some people do maintain own lists, but I don't understand how MTX helps them blacklist either. > The problem of deciding at which point you blacklist somebody is the reason > why my blacklist implementation allows you to set an SA score for each > domain. So hosts which send legitimate email *and* spam you can give a > score which only negates the effect of the MTX Pass. > > The public blacklist implementation also allows for this distinction. I'm sure you know that SA is not the only software/appliance out there. Probably even the minority. Ijf you want to keep a list, it needs to be DNS based anyway. Do you really think once a day update is enough for data which can be old in matter of minutes?
