Re: Fastest listing RBL ?

On 2017-02-15 16:30, Tom Hendrikx wrote: > Note that the period that you describe as 'seen by SA a bit later' is > typically less than a second. Not in my case. I have a custom Exim configuration where I intentionally wait for a period of time (currently 4 minutes) between SMTP acceptance and

Re: Fastest listing RBL ?

>From: Ian Zimmerman >Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 10:04 PM >To: users@spamassassin.apache.org >Subject: Fastest listing RBL ?   >Given a piece of horrible spam, on which RBL is the sending IP address >likely to appear first? >I want to rationally decide which RBL/s to

Re: Fastest listing RBL ?

I cannot state strongly enough, that blocking entire top-level domains these days should come before RBL. *.top, *.link, *.download, etc. RBL depends on paid or free. Paid: Spamhaus, the 800 lb gorilla of RBL. Also URIBL various feeds. Direct query to a dedicated address with fresh data FTW.

Re: Fastest listing RBL ?

On 2/14/2017 11:04 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote: Given a piece of horrible spam, on which RBL is the sending IP address likely to appear first? I want to rationally decide which RBL/s to consult at SMTP time. Afraid to use all of them, not just due to false positives, but also due to negative

Re: Fastest listing RBL ?

On 15-02-17 15:19, Bowie Bailey wrote: > On 2/14/2017 11:04 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote: >> Given a piece of horrible spam, on which RBL is the sending IP address >> likely to appear first? >> >> I want to rationally decide which RBL/s to consult at SMTP time. Afraid >> to use all of them, not just

Re: Fastest listing RBL ?

On 2/14/2017 11:04 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote: Given a piece of horrible spam, on which RBL is the sending IP address likely to appear first? I want to rationally decide which RBL/s to consult at SMTP time. Afraid to use all of them, not just due to false positives, but also due to negative