On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 00:29, Francisco Borges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SpamCop works fine for my own email, where most people are whitelisted, > but is said [1] not to be suitable for a production environment and what > we have here is precisely that...
I know of some ISPs that use SpamCop. It generally works well and has good proceedures for removing bogus entries. I have had my mail server using the SpamCop DNSBL for years and had hardly any problems of legit mail being rejected. Below is my Postfix configuration line for anti-spam systems. SpamCop is first because it gets the highest hit rate and the majority of spams get discarded from it before even having to query other servers (should be good for you as you mention having an over-loaded server). The DNSBL entries below are roughly in order of hit rate - the last few entries catch hardly any spam due to duplicate entries with other lists. By far the most false-positive entries I have had are from postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org and abuse.rfc-ignorant.org. The postmaster list gets hotmail.com (and many others), and the abuse list gets yahoo.com (with many more others). I was forced to remove the abuse list from my configuration as it got so many hits on non-spam email, and the postmaster list is a border-line case. smtpd_client_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net, reject_rbl_client dnsbl.sorbs.net, reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org, reject_rbl_client cbl.abuseat.org, reject_rbl_client dnsbl.njabl.org, reject_rbl_client sbl.spamhaus.org, reject_rbl_client relays.ordb.org, reject_rhsbl_client rhsbl.sorbs.net, reject_rhsbl_client dsn.rfc-ignorant.org, reject_rhsbl_client postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
