>> Please feel free to point out any inaccuracies, as we would be more than
>> happy to fix them.
>
>Well, some of the text of entries I would have pointed out, have been
>updated today... so no longer relevant. For example earlier today the
>entry for the SBL (sbl.spamhaus.org) had a 'warning' against it that it
>blocked 'large IP ranges'.
Yes, that was corrected today. That warning was based on information we
received three days ago, but was meant for a different spam database.
>In fact the SBL has extremely low collateral damage...
That's why we fixed the entry. :)
>In comparison, lists like spambag.org and blackholes.five-ten-sg.com block
>extremely large ranges, in many case whole ISPs to intentionally create
>collateral damage, yet their entries have no 'warning'...
Spambag does now, and FIVETENIGNORE has a warning as that's the only one of
the blackholes.five-ten-sg.com tests we know of that that lists large
ranges that can easily include non-spammers. If there are other
blackholes.five-ten-sg.com tests that are likely to have intentional
collateral damage, please let me know.
>To a new user unfamiliar with DNSBLs (and hence using www.declude.com to
>find the right DNSBL for them) the different descriptions for very similar
>lists would be confusing (for example, SBL does in fact block the same
>things as the MAPS RBL, only the SBL concentrates more on the
>'professional scumbag' type spammers (the chickenboners and spam gangs)
>while MAPS tends to concentrate more on the mainstream 'postmastergeneral'
>type spammers.
... and the new user most likely isn't going to know the differences
between those types of spammers. While people who stay up to date with
Spam-L probably know the differences, they also probably already have a
good idea of the differences between the various tests.
If there are ways to easily differentiate tests that someone not familiar
with spam fighting terms would understand, we'll consider adding them. The
problem is that there are three general levels of spam knowledge: [1] What
the average mail server admin knows (very little), [2] What someone who has
dealt with spam for years knows (a lot), and [3] What the average Spam-L
reader knows (a whole lot more than #2, including lots of terms that are
hard to understand without immersing yourself in the spam fighting
underworld). Our list is geared towards #1, while remaining a useful
resource for #2 and #3. People who are looking for the subtle (or not so
subtle!) differences between tests can go to the URLs for them to find out
more.
>You could probably make things much clearer for new users just by grouping
>the DNSBLs together, into groups of spam-source, relays, proxies, etc.
That's something that we are planning on doing. We just need to figure out
a way of doing it, while not detracting from the current format. We only
recently went with the alphabetical listing, so maybe just splitting them
up into the type of test would work fine (although it would then be harder
to compare the different tests in the same zone, such as all the
blackholes.five-ten-dul.com tests).
-Scott
---
Declude: Anti-virus, Anti-spam and Anti-hijacking solutions for
IMail. http://www.declude.com
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
#############################################################
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
