[SURBL-Discuss] familiar with xml?

kieran mullen kieranmullen at gmail.com
Wed Feb 13 03:54:30 CET 2008


i too believe nothing has changed on the surbl side.  as usuall  is
probably me.  a copy of the code used is at
http://clip.drlinky.com/149606

thank you

kieranmullen

On Feb 12, 2008 12:54 AM, Jeff Chan <jeffc at surbl.org> wrote:
> Quoting kieran mullen <kieranmullen at gmail.com>:
>
> > SURBL was great when it was running. It made me wonder if I should
> > even run any other RBL's at all?
>
> Most people use Spamhaus in their MTAs.
>
> > This is off topic already but what is generally thought to have less
> >  overhead?
> >
> > It would seem to be that RBLs would but their effectiveness have
> > really dropped with the use of massive botnets.
>
> Some RBLs do a pretty good job of detecting botnets.  Use Spamhaus.
>
> > Anyhow regarding my topic...
> >
> >
> > something has changed in the usage of the lists and so my false
> > positives has jumped.
>
> Nothing has changed on the list side.
>
> > This is doug swallows plugin for Icewarp MerakMail. (the author has
> > long since dropped support for this project)
> >
> > http://clip.drlinky.com/149606
> >
> > I have altered the scope to not include the header (from the surblg
> > list I was told to) and also to not scan the ip addresses but to no
> > avail.
> >
> > I was getting false positives for test invites I was sending myself
> > from linked in.
> >
> > I believe it is the way counting is performed that is messing things
> > up a bit. From the looks of it a count of 1 is rejected, but 1 is
> > added to everything anyway  surbl_multi_count += 1
>
> Please provide an example and an explanation of what surbl_multi_count means.
>
> Again nothing on the SURBL list side has changed.
>
> Jeff C.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.surbl.org
> http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>


More information about the Discuss mailing list