I apologise for replying to an original email.  I will not do that again :-(

THANK YOU Shantanu for the really quick response and the advice with links.
I have added dnsbl-1.uceprotect.net and removed cymru dnsbl.

I am registered with barracuda, but I had heard before that barracuda can
reject a fair number of genuine emails (I never remember if that is a false
negative or a false positive!).   If I include barracuda as well, is there a
way to monitor what they have rejected, or must we wait for people to tell
us that email is not getting through.

Separately, I do notice a small but sufficiently significant number of
genuine emails which get rejected with no reverse DNS.  Should we be happy
to put email addresses on the white list, or is that dangerous with Spammers
being able to get through if they purport to be that address?  Up to now, we
have just passed on the maillog entry on so that they can check it out with
their own hosting company.

Is it an easy script that we can run to see the percentages being rejected
by the various stages?  The one I have is:
cat /usr/local/psa/var/log/maillog | /etc/spamdyke-statistics.pl

Kind regards, 
 
Christoph

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kulkarni Shantanu
Sent: 26 August 2009 09:40
To: spamdyke users
Subject: Re: [spamdyke-users] newbie question - please bear with me - some
Spam getting through

* Christoph Kuhle (Expat Email Ltd) <[email protected]> [090826 13:27]:
> I have spamdyke, with Atomic Secured Linux as well, protecting a server,
and
> it works well generally, stopping about 50% of emails (I note that some
> people have reported 90+% Spam statistics).  I have just run a DNSStuff
> Anti-Spam Filtering Test.  It got through:

Please do not start a new thread by replying to an old mail & changing
the subject line. it screws up threading. 

well, we have managed to block 92-94% spam by various filters of spamdyke.
I would recommend removing cymru dnsbl and replacing that with of
barracuda networks. also consider a local dnsbl of zones from
uceprotect, so there will not be any network overheads.

also see,
http://www.shantanukulkarni.org/rbl-compare.html
http://www.shantanukulkarni.org/spam_analysis.html  (done in feb 09)

Shantanu
www.shantanukulkarni.org
-- 
_______________________________________________
spamdyke-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

_______________________________________________
spamdyke-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Reply via email to