On Wednesday, September 8, 2004, 12:44:34 AM, Bill Landry wrote:
Quick question: If I have set "spamcop_uri_limit 25" in my spamcop_uri.cf file, and a spammer sends a message containing 30 URIs, all legit except one, and 10 of the legit URIs are whitelisted by SURBL, would all of the remaining URIs get checked, or still only a random selection of the entire 30 URIs found in the message?
25 would get checked randomly from the 30 IIRC. 5 would be not checked.
Just wondering if the whitelisting will help us to be more accurate in tagging the spammer URI in the message, thus cutting down the possibility of the spammer URI not being one of the random 25 selected for checking against the SURBLs.
I'm curious to know what effect the SURBL whitelisting has as it applies to both SA 2.6x with the SpamCopURI plug-in and SA 3.0 with the URIDNSBL plug-in and the random URI check limit threshold.
Bill
The SURBL whitelist is an internal exclusion list which currently has no direct effect on SpamAssassin. All it does now is to make sure that these domains do not get added to any SURBLs.
Instead of publishing the whitelist for example as a "do not check" RBL, we may ask that SpamCopURI and urirhsbl and urhrhssub take a hard-coded list of the top N most queried legitimate domains and never query on them. But that doesn't happen yet.
Theo, Should I open an RFE about this for URIDNSBL?
Bill, If you'd like, you can have a similar effect right now by adding the top N domains from:
http://www.surbl.org/dns-queries.whitelist.counts.txt
to the SpamCopURI manual whitelist in the conf file. You'd want to include both basedomain.com and *.basedomain.com . In fact this should be a good improvement for everyone using SpamCopURI to add.
Eric Kolve may be able to provide more details, or someone could just try it. :-)
Jeff C.