[SURBL-Discuss] RFC: pj.surbl.org - list from Joe Wein and Pr olocation data

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Sun Sep 19 11:23:48 CEST 2004


On Sunday, September 19, 2004, 2:11:20 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
>>> Remember that the PJ records are already in multi, as
>>> part of WS

>> That's cheating.  If the WS bit is set I'd expect a WS
>> entry, with the WS policy and whitelisting instructions.
>>
>> Sure, at the moment there are no different whitelisting
>> instructions for the MULTI sets, but that's not obvious.
>> And sooner or later it will change.

> There is generic whitelisting, on *ALL* SURBL lists, and thats done on a 
> central level. That will be the most important mask, since al lists walk 
> by.

To clarify a little, we can whitelist over all SURBLs,
and we do that a lot since any FPs found in one list
should be excluded from other lists also.

But there is also whitelisting per data source, which
means contacting the individual data sources and asking
them to exclude right at their source data.  Those are
the contacts mentioned on the lists page.

[...]
> SpamAssassin tag hits: (top 100)
> #1      53053   URIBL_WS_SURBL
> #2      51711   URIBL_PJ_SURBL

> The WS stats are still the combined lists, i also did tests with a special 
> zonefile, compiled for this test, where PJ data was taken out of WS. There 
> PJ performed better then the whole WS. That was my main reason to propose 
> a seperate list. Its smaller, catches more then the combined list, and has 
> a lower FP rating then the combined list.

To be clear, the combined list that Raymond is referring to in
this case is WS, which has several different data sources in
it.  (Not to be confused with multi.surbl.org which combines
several separate lists together.)

Jeff C.



More information about the Discuss mailing list