On 14-Jun-2016, at 8:38 PM, Michael Peddemors <mich...@linuxmagic.com> wrote: > A little funny.. First of all, we use SpamRats in ALL our email platforms, > and spam protection products. They have been around for 10 years, and there > are a lot of comparison charts out there on the effectiveness of this list, > so 'small' still means protecting millions of users worldwide, with an > incredibly low false positive rate.
That is quite a testimonial I suppose - and I wish you all the best / continued good results using them. That said, I haven’t seen 163 leak any more or less spam than any of the comparable large freemails, personally speaking. rDNS based regexps - well, I’ve run my share of numbers to conclude they’re far better at being used elsewhere (to see just why you’re seeing so much traffic to an application from a proxy vpn, an elastic cloud etc) than to make any sort of determination on mail traffic from dynamic hosts. For mail, Spamhaus PBL does a good enough job on that, and doesn’t tend to insert large freemail MTAs. —srs _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
