[SURBL-Discuss] Proposing a greylist

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Thu Sep 2 18:27:40 CEST 2004


On Thursday, September 2, 2004, 10:09:52 AM, Ryan Thompson wrote:
> Further, I think *not* having a greylist leads to errors and
> controversy, because even the most careful submitters will (thanks to
> human nature) have a tendency to want to put domains *somewhere*. It's
> damned hard to admit that somedomain.com appears in a dozen local spams,
> has a bunch of NANAS hits, but, jeez, it's so *close*, but maybe, just
> maybe, they have some legit uses. A greylist ought to keep the size of
> our blacklist smaller, so that it really *is* as close to a pure
> blacklist as we can make it.

> Borderline: The borderline cases will now have a proper home, and rely
> less on submitters' judgement.

A greylist could therefore become a dumping ground for
submissions people were too lazy to research or categorize.
Just because something is difficult to categorize does not
mean it should get blocked, even for individual home users.

That could also result in some full spammers not going onto
the blacklists where they belong, basically due to lack of
enough effort to properly categorize them.

The usefulness of such a list would tend to undermine itself
due to factors like that.

We need to try to think through as many of the consequences
as possible ahead of time.

Jeff C.



More information about the Discuss mailing list