[SURBL-Discuss] Re: New xs.surbl list
raymond at surbl.org
Sat Apr 23 12:20:23 CEST 2005
>> So basicly if you block with DSBL i dont see a point using this.
> The point is that DSBLs have delays in getting new IPs listed,
> but the same URIs may tend to get advertised from fresh zombies.
> Therefore if we get the URIs we will catch spams even before the
> fresh zombie IPs get listed.
What delays? No more delays then XS also has with reloading the zonefiles.
If there were noticable delays i would have seen hits would i?
I dont say XS is a bad idea, i just post what i have seen, its a test ...
My test results are allmost below 0.... thats all.
> The particular set of data currently in XS won't show much 0 hour
> spams because it's set so conservatively. It takes a lot of
> spams already seen to get included. What is more interesting
> to checking at this conservative setting is how spammy the
> URIs it detects are. When we crank down the settings and
> catch more URIs sooner, then we should catch more zero hour
> spams, including ones where the sender IPs don't show up on
> RBLs yet (because URIs likely change more slowly than sender
If thats raised i can test again, no problem at all, but the ammount of
FP's is also high, disney cough cough ... :)
More information about the Discuss