> >> Alex wrote: > >> > I'm interested in people's opinion of UCEPROTECT. I'm aware of how > >> > it works, but even UCEPROTECT1 seems to catch an awful lot of ham, > >> > and I wondered if I was doing something wrong. > > > > On 26.11.09 23:09, Per Jessen wrote: > >> Don't use UCEPROTECT for catching, only for scoring.
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > > well, there are some postmasters/hosts using even L2 and L3 at SMTP > > time for rejecting. On 27.11.09 12:56, Per Jessen wrote: > I have no doubt there is. Doesn't change anything for uceprotect, imo. > > > We have ticket open where a host is rejecting your mail because IP in > > Received: is in backscatterer.org. > > Yeah, I know (which ticket is this?) > > > > > Some people don't know what they are doing. > > Too many, unfortunately. I'm only saying that anyone publishing a RBL SHOULD know what is he doing and that some people apparently will use it for anything therefore (s)he should be carefull enough about publishing it. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Save the whales. Collect the whole set.
