Good afternoon, all, Through the tremendous efforts of so many contributors, the ws.surbl.org and its equivalent sa-blacklist have crossed 26,000 live (after the disabled and expired domains have been removed) domains. My _sincere_ thanks to everyone that has worked so hard to make this project work.

There have been occasional questions about why the surbl's aren't scored higher. The answer is simple, and is based upon the one universal truth in spam characterization: "_Every_ technique used to identify spam _can screw up_." It's my sincere hope that the surbls, and my pet ws.surbl.org in particular, screw up less than most, but it's still true that they can cause false positives.

I'm asking everyone that uses any surbls (that includes anyone using the sa-blacklist.cf, sa-blacklist.uri.cf, ws.surbl.org, *.surbl.org, spamassasin 3.0, and spamassassin 2.x with spamcopuri) for help. If you get any legitimate messages where one of the above mistakenly tagged the message as spam, _please_ let me know. I would sincerely appreciate it if you'd send the message to me as an attachment (forwards or bounces are OK too) with "blacklist" somewhere in the subject (this skips around my spam filters; I don't want the autowhitelist to start tagging _you_ as a spammer!). I'm asking for your help because false positives hurt all of us. I'd much rather have a blacklist with 3 domains I'm absolutely certain of than a blacklist with 120,000 iffy domains. Cheers, - Bill

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Maybe is an Ambivalent Yet Beguiling Enigma" (Courtesy of Dale Harris rodmur@maybe.org) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- William Stearns (wstearns@pobox.com). Mason, Buildkernel, freedups, p0f, rsync-backup, ssh-keyinstall, dns-check, more at: http://www.stearns.org --------------------------------------------------------------------------