[SURBL-Discuss] Proposing a greylist

Chris Santerre csanterre at merchantsoverseas.com
Fri Sep 3 18:10:09 CEST 2004

It has been moved off list. See Ryan's post. If you would like to be
involved, contact him. 

--Chris (wishes this thread to go away now.)

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bret Miller [mailto:bret.miller at wcg.org]
>Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 5:00 PM
>To: SURBL Discussion list
>Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Proposing a greylist
>To further this idea, comparing it to DNSBLs is appropriate. 
>There are a
>lot of DSNBLs you can use. Many agree that sbl-xbl spamhaus lists are
>high quality with no (or almost no) false positives. For that reason, a
>lot of us use them to block e-mail. 
>Bl.spamcop.net is another DNSBL, and while it's a fine list, 
>the FP rate
>is much too high for me to block e-mail on it alone. However, it's
>highly useful in SpamAssassin, putting many messages over the 
>spam score
>While the SURBL staff has decided that they would rather not "divide
>their efforts" to support a project like this, it certainly 
>doesn't mean
>that it shouldn't be done be someone else. At that point, the staff is
>right to ask that the discussion about its details be moved off this
>list. Perhaps the better place to discuss this is the SA 
>general list as
>they are more open to just about any new project that helps SA detect
>spam accurately.
>I know if I relied totally on any one method of filtering 
>spam, a lot of
>spam would be getting through that isn't. It's because the 
>comination of
>content and structure analysis with bayesian analysis DNSBL and URIBL
>all contributes to the end result.
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss at lists.surbl.org

More information about the Discuss mailing list