> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Santerre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > 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.
