And by that, I mean..
I'm not sure I *object*, because there *are* blacklists we
trust... but in general, I think we try and avoid doing things that
could cause people to lose mail unintentionally. So I think I lean
slightly towards the "consistent defaults of header tagging" side.
-R
Robert
How about instead of hardcoding this, make deny be the default in the
sample config?
-R
Jared Johnson wrote:
>
> Would anyone object to setting the default action to 'deny' on certain
> reliable low-fp URIBL lists? Probably Spamhaus SBL-XBL and DBL and URIBL
> Black. It seems like a new user
Would anyone object to setting the default action to 'deny' on certain
reliable low-fp URIBL lists? Probably Spamhaus SBL-XBL and DBL and URIBL
Black. It seems like a new user turning on uribl checks would expect them
to do something more than adding headers, as long as the services it
rejects fo
