Some people need to put in some alternate values for DNS timeouts, but if you've got a local caching name server, you typically don't need that.
There aren't any actual bugs in it that I'm aware of, so I haven't released a new version. As I see it, there isn't a need (and that is a somewhat controversial statement with some of the more opinionated people around here). I do still see some things that get nailed by it ... but there's lots of those same hosts that get caught by the Spamhaus PBL. So, it kind of depends on what you're doing with PBL and/or Zen, as to whether or not you need Botnet. But, there are still plenty of things coming from that class of hosts, so if you don't use one, I'd definitely recommend using the other. John Rudd On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 14:34, Micah Anderson <mi...@riseup.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > I've been using the Botnet plugin version 0.8 for some time now, and the > plugin itself has been around since 2003 or so. I'm just curious to test > the waters and see what other's think about the relevance in 2010 of > this plugin. Does it still contribute in positive ways to your setup? I > do not see a newer version of the plugin since 2007, is there a newer > version than 0.8? > > Did you do any configuration of it beyond its defaults? Does the > proliferation of individuals on dynamically assigned cable/dsl modems > cause the plugin to misfire too often? > > I've had a number of complaints somewhat recently about the last point, > and I don't have much of a solution to the situation where a user is > stuck with the dynamically assigned IP that previously a spammer was > occupying, except to explain that is the situation and eventually it > will change. > > thanks for any thoughts or experiences with this plugin! > > micah > > ps. I notice it is not listed on > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CustomPlugins and I wonder the > reason why? > >
