Glenn Little wrote:
Why? If you use these things within SpamAssassin, the rule still holds true that no one thing will make a message spam or ham. So, if a message hits 3 seperate black lists, and that makes it spam, can your "customer base" seriously say that 3 different black lists falsely listed a server and it was falsely tagged as spam? I think THAT would be the difficult sell. Using these lists alone as the sole reason to block email definitely can be argued against, but I've found that some lists, specifically the ones that list dynamic IPs, have little to no false positives. Considering the amount of email I block with a single RBL that lists dynamic IPs, I would NEVER turn it off. 6 months with 150000-200000 emails a day, and not a single complaint of a false positive is pretty dam good. So, if you choose your RBLs wisely, using them to block email directly with your MTA can work.Regarding the RBL checks, we just didn't want the overhead (we process a ton of email). Also, we're a university and some of our "customer base" is pretty against the RBL concept.
Same thing with razor and pyzor.
Maybe those are what would get us more reasonable scores, I don't know. But for better or worse, using any of them would be a difficult sell at this point.
-glenn
Razor, Pyzor, and DCC list emails based on human submissions (the best spam detector in my opinion is a human). These lists are probably more accurate because it is the actual content of the message that is blacklisted, not the server it came from. So, Bob Legit's email even though it comes from the same server as Joe Spammer's email, will not get marked by one of these lists. Again, the rule holds true though, no single one of these lists alone will cause a message to be marked spam.
Chris
