on Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 10:42:17AM -0800, R. Douglas Barbieri ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > I was talking to Ryan C. after the last Lugod meeting and he highly > recommended using RBLs. He said his ISP cut their spam down immensely > as soon as they hooked it up.
They're best when used:
- As part of an overall weighted antispam system. E.g.:
Spamassassin. With remote checks in place, various RBLs are
checked, and weighted appropriately. Downside: many users disable
these as they're expensive in terms of time.
- As part of a teergrubing system. Allow mail from RBL'd IPs, (or
filter it downstream) but slow it down. This puts the onus directly
back on the remote site to clear up their problem else all their
mail service back up.
The best current antispam systems:
- Occur at SMTP connect time.
- Are effective (block spam), accurate (don't pass spam), and specific
(don't block non-spam). Context-based or Bayesian filters come
closest to meeting these goals.
> I'm running Exim 3. Has anyone out there any experience with putting in
> RBL's in Exim 3? I hear that you can use Spamcop's RBL for free, but are
> there others?
Google for Marc Merlin's SA + Exim4 SMTP-time blocking + teergrube.
Also read (as previously mentioned) Paul Graham's site.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Geek for hire: http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
