On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 11:33:00 GMT Angel Rivera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > J C Lawrence writes:
>> Which are precisely the reasons I don't and won't do SPAM filtering >> at the MTA. The potential cost of error is high, and almost all >> ability to supervise and correct is lost. > A lot of these problems are probably due to misconfigured tools. Accepted, partially. Various RBLs have a tendency to mark associated netblocks, which I find deceptive. > I am a firm believer of RBLs and we use that as the first line of > defense against spam. If it has come to the point where someone is on > one of the RBLs we use-we need a break. > To that we have added SpamAssassin in tagging mode. The few false > positives that it catches are simply tagged and can be whitelisted. I use RBLs, SpamAssasin, Razor, TMDA and a few privately developed filters in concert at LDA time to assist in correct folder filing. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. [EMAIL PROTECTED] He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
