Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
Sorry, I see our current approach as a much better solution.
Obviously you are not seeing the power in the current approach.
fritz
Apparently, I'm not understand the power of the current system, then.
The current approach, as I understand it, has two ways of using it. You
either kill a message on a single RBL hit (which is a little excessive),
or you use Penalty Box Single Message Mode to score it. With the
scoring, you either get 0 for no hits, X for RBL Neutral, or Y for RBL Fail.
If you have 6 RBL providers, and Minimum hits is set to 2, then one hit
would get score X, but 2-6 hits would get score Y. Shouldn't more hits
generate a higher score? Is it not the case that as the number of RBLs
that list a certain IP increases, so does the likelihood that the IP is
sending spam?
With the current system, you would have to use only the most generic
RBLs and each hit would be given the same weight, be it from a
high-quality RBL or a sloppy RBL (like SpamCop).
How is that more powerful than a more granular score-adding system where
each RBL is weighed individually and additively?
http://www.declude.com/Articles.asp?ID=97&Redirected=Y
http://www.moensted.dk/spam/
are two lists of most RBLs in operation today, you can get many ideas
for RBLs that aren't the standard antispam RBLs, but would still find
use in blocking spam; such as lists of dynamic IPs, country-based lists,
and others.
David
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Assp-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
