[nycbug-talk] Mail Server In CBL List
lists at stringsutils.com
Sat Nov 4 17:57:58 EST 2006
alex at pilosoft.com writes:
> spamhaus SBL is generally sane, although lately its been moving into
> "collateral damage" direction. nevertheless, it is probably the sanest.
SBL only? not sbl-xbl?
I like psbl, http://psbl.surriel.com, because it is completely based on
spamtraps.. and you can easily get an IP out automatically.
Funny you mention spamhaus.. after you said cbl was not very good. Spamhaus
loads the cbl list into one of their lists (I think the sbl-xbl one).
> I can say what *not* to use: SORBS/SPEWS/spamcop.
Add fiveten to the list. I can not but be amazed that people use that at
all. He would block entire nets because they are owned by a company that he
believes doesn't fight spam enough.. so you can have THOUSANDS of IPs
blocked that have never sent any spam.
> a) MTA front-end: short (1 minute) greylisting
I like greylisting, but the amount of broken MTAs out there is pretty scary.
Have you found 1 minute to be effective? Why so low?
> c) blacklists
My current home list for RBLs is
Good for a home, small company setup... BAD for a large setup with lots of
At work I think I use something like
Although I read many complaints about spamcop, I find that we get
relatively few complaints about it from users, yet stops a good deal of
The one RBL that surprised me on how much it caches.. and also the amount of
complain from users.. is psbl.surriel.com
That RBL is completely based on spamtraps.. and it is very easy to get out..
go to a page.. enter IP... yet we get complaints from customers.. who are
too lazy to read the description on the bounce back and to unsubscribe the
IP they are trying to get mail from.
Part of the problem with dealing with spam.. is the different levels of
tolerance from different customers.. Some customers will rather get all the
spam in the world.. instead of missing emails from customers.. while others
will rather not get all the mail from people they deal with.. as long as
they don't get spam.
More information about the talk