>-----Original Message----- >From: Don Levey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 11:09 AM >To: users@spamassassin.apache.org >Subject: RE: SPEWS still sucks > > >Rick Macdougall wrote: >> Daniel Quinlan wrote: >>> Raymond Dijkxhoorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> >>> >>>> Ohw well, lists.surbl.org also. At some point they hopefully >>>> understand that list will completely useless, and indeed insain for >>>> people to actually use it. Sadly, people still do. >>> >>> >>> Whatever your unstated reasons are, I beg to differ. Weekly >>> mass-check results for SURBL: >> >> Perhaps he means spews lists lists.surbl.org. I can't see anyone >> having issues with any of the SURBL RBL's. >> >I must not have things set up correctly then. >I get many MANY false positives from the SURBL lists, in the >case where the >server that actually sent me the message records the IP from which they >received it. > >For example, [EMAIL PROTECTED] sends me email. It goes from his >PC to the MTA >of fubar.isp, and from there to my server. Fubar.isp records >the PC's IP >address in the headers, and passes the message; on my server, >Spamassassin >sees that the original IP is listed, and tags it. Never mind >that it came >to me via a reputable server, the original IP is "bad". > >How, then, do I fix this so that the lists are more useful: so >that they >check the most recent hop, and not (necessarily) all hops in the chain? > -Don
Being that SURBL deals ONLY with URLs, what the heck are you talking about? --Chris
