[SURBL-Discuss] RFC: SURBL inclusion policy

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Sun Sep 26 13:50:57 CEST 2004

On Sunday, September 26, 2004, 3:39:29 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
(Alex wrote:)
>>> Why not add Spamhaus' XBL zone lookups?

(Ryan replied:)
>> The thought had only briefly crossed my mind.  Is XBL really a good
>> resource for SURBL classification? I thought XBL just listed exploited
>> systems and open HTTP proxies. Hmm. I suppose I could just code it up
>> and run it on a bunch of mail to see what happens... Or I could just use
>> the combined sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org list, I suppose.

> I would really only use SBL, if you check agains XBL you could also test 
> on DSBL, but we want to get the hardcore non-proxy spammers. The zombies 
> are stopped with DSBL/XBL and alike anyway. Any thoughts?

Yes, there was perhaps some confusion about what Alex meant
in suggesting XBL.  If he meant use it to check headers then
I agree it's a useful way to spot zombie and open server usage.
If he meant to try XBL against spam URIs, then I agree it
probably won't do much.

Jeff C.
"If it appears in hams, then don't list it."

More information about the Discuss mailing list