[SURBL-Discuss] RE: quick poll on SURBL hit %

Chris Santerre csanterre at MerchantsOverseas.com
Wed Jan 5 18:44:02 CET 2005



>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gary Funck [mailto:gary at intrepid.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 12:30 PM
>To: SURBL Discussion List (E-mail); Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail)
>Subject: RE: quick poll on SURBL hit %
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Chris Santerre [mailto:csanterre at MerchantsOverseas.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 7:16 AM
>> 
>> Just curious as to what average percent of spam people see SURBL 
>> hitting. In
>> a non scientific manor, I average about 85% or greater hitting 
>> SURBL for all
>> spam that doesn't get rejected by my MTA. I have a feeling if I 
>> clean up my
>> results a bit, that number would be even higher. 
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Chris Santerre [mailto:csanterre at MerchantsOverseas.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 7:16 AM
>> 
>> Just curious as to what average percent of spam people see SURBL 
>> hitting. In
>> a non scientific manor, I average about 85% or greater hitting 
>> SURBL for all
>> spam that doesn't get rejected by my MTA. I have a feeling if I 
>> clean up my
>> results a bit, that number would be even higher. 
>
>Very anecdotal, but of the last 20 messages scored as spam, 
>only 1 of them
>did not hit on any SURBL's.  On a daily basis about 2 or 3 per 
>user, out
>of an average of 200 to 300 non-spam messages delivered, were 
>diagnosed as
>non-spam, and were not registered in the SURBL when 
>delievered, but when
>manually checked later, their offending URL's had been registered in at
>least one, and often several, SURBL's.  SURBL's are definitely 
>workling.

Nice. Ryans numbers look good as well. I think Jeff's magic threshold number
was 88%? Our response times are getting really good. I've had numerous
submissions that trigger on SURBL! 

We've got some ideas for that last 10-12% ;)

--Chris 


More information about the Discuss mailing list