On 25/09/2012 16:52, francis picabia wrote:
I didn't see that response on the list, so perhaps it was sent to only to you. This sounds like nonsense to me. DNS BL's block thousands of messages cheaply, yes. What is wrong with that? Unless we have lots of false positives, what is the problem? If you choose your block list sources well, the false positive count will be very low. I have users who demand low false positive rates and complain if it is otherwise. I know DNS BLs are rejecting junk and saving on scanning, etc. Likewise for postscreen disconnecting remote servers that talk out of turn - these are useful tricks and if they were dumping legit emails, users would tell people like me.Unfortunately, for many of us running in production corporate service provider environments false positives need to be very low... (read < 0.00001%).
-- Regards, Giles Coochey, CCNA, CCNAS NetSecSpec Ltd +44 (0) 7983 877438 http://www.coochey.net http://www.netsecspec.co.uk gi...@coochey.net
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
