>From: Rob McEwen <r...@invaluement.com> >Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 12:47 AM >To: users@spamassassin.apache.org >Subject: Re: Uptick in spam
>On 3/27/2015 10:13 PM, David Jones wrote: >> The invaluement RBL is not expensive either and it is awesome. We pay >> thousands per year for >> a Spamhaus feed because of our volume and mailboxes. The invaluement RBL is >> only hundreds >> per year and it's almost as good as Spamhaus Zen. I have Spamhaus in front >> of invaluement in >> my postfix configuration but I may try flipping the order just to see if it >> will start blocking more >> than Spamhaus. >Just to clarify, the two invaluement sender's IP blacklists, ivmSIP and >ivmSIP/24, --combined-- is not (and will probably not ever be) an >adequate replacement for Spamhaus's Zen list. So please everyone, don't >get the idea that you can turn off Zen, add invaluement, and everything >will be ok. David Jones was NOT saying that... but i just want to make >sure that nobody mistakenly goes too far with this, beyond what David >intended. Thank you for making that clear. I only meant to say that I would be interested in putting ivm first just to see it's full blocking power. Right now it's second behind zen.spamhaus.org so I am not seeing it's complete potential. You made it clear in the setup that it was not a replacement for spamhaus. >Having said that... thanks, David, (and others) for your mentioning >about your success with ivmSIP and ivmSIP/24, where they are helping you >block much of the spam that slips past Spamhaus, etc. It's a great product that is not widely known. I didn't hear about it soon enough. Thank you for making the cost very reasonable. Now we just need more people using it to support your efforts and keep the spam off of the Internet reliably. >-- >Rob McEwen
