On Monday, April 5, 2004, 7:36:47 AM, Marc Perkel wrote: > Also - is there a way to feed back to the system new URIs for the list? > A URI reporting system?
There is no way to report URIs directly to SURBL currently. The best way is to report them in spams to SpamCop. It's indirect but does the right thing if enough people do likewise and report the same domain a few more times. That said, I'm reworking the thresholding and retention system to probably make the threshold much lower for known spam domain IPs and Name servers as Daniel Quinlan suggested. After watching the data for a while I think a longer general retention of say 10 days might be a good idea to catch reports over more than a week. For known spam gang domains/name servers/IPs we could make the retention a whole lot longer. And domains that get dozens to hundreds of reports should probably also be watched a lot longer using a longer retention. Domains that get reported most probably deserve the most attention through longer retention and perhaps a lower inclusion threshold. We would get external "known bad guys" data from other RBLs in order to adjust thresholds and expirations, but the inclusion of a domain in SURBL would still be triggered by SpamCop URI reports. But the trigger point would be lower for "bad guys". This was a good suggestion from Daniel. Are there any RBLs that are widely regarded as good indicators of spam gang/spamhaus IPs other than SBLs? Also, can anyone help us set up (or know where we can set up) a discussion forum for SURBL? We'd like to use it as a "star chamber" for anti-spam veterans to join us in judging incoming spam domains reaching the threshold to decide whether they belong to spammers or are a false alarm and should be whitelisted. We could also have blacklist recommendations and other discussion there. At this point we may need the help a community could bring to help run things with SURBL. Jeff C. -- Jeff Chan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.surbl.org/
