On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Justin Mason<[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 19:06, Warren Togami<[email protected]> wrote: >> http://psbl.surriel.com/ >> >> Would it be difficult to add PSBL to spamassassin? I have been using it for >> a while now and it seems to be very good. It is free. >> >> It seems to be a very simple but effective DNSBL. Anything that harvested >> addresses and had sent mail to spam traps gets added. Removal from the list >> is quick and easy with a self-serve form. >> >> http://stats.dnsbl.com/ >> These stats seem to indicate it is of good quality. >> >> Could we add it as an experimental rule for the automated tests at first? > > I checked it out _years_ ago and it seemed to have serious false > positives problems. however it's certainly improved since then, going > by the stats on Al Iverson's site. > Could you open a bug on the BZ to get it added? >
We've used the PSBL for quite some time here. Few problems with FP, however it hits a very, very small amount of traffic (past 24 hours = 0.04%) when used after zen and a couple others. Not sure that adding it as a default test would be worth the extra traffic generated. Also, would PBSL be happy with the extra load suddenly added to their servers? Perhaps this should be something you can add if desired (exactly as it is now). -Aaron
