https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6048
--- Comment #7 from Anthony Howe <[email protected]> 2009-01-22 02:37:45 PST --- >> If uribl.com can identify a host as high volume so as to change the results >> based on that host's IP address, then they could as easily just blacklist or >> drop the request and NOT return a result that would do the mail server harm. > Uribl.com has uses these options and uses regularly. > When the abuser never stops or hits skyhigh levels, then the positive reply is > applied. > Its not the generic/default case. The above makes no sense. Blacklist in my comment means reject the IP, do NOT return a positive result for ALL queries, as this does harm. Dropping the packet would be better, because then the server sees lots of timeouts that might delay mail, but not cause it to be lost or filtered. In response to Oli Schacher: Knowing uribl.com policies or negative behaviour and the impact on SA users is important. I believe that enabling URIBL_* rules by default is BAD for everyone. If the user is sufficiently capable to enable them themselves, then they are sufficiently capable to deal with future fallout if necessary. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
