On 07/04/2025 12:27, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
"Simon Wilson" <si...@simonandkate.net> writes:
My results (about 1800 inbound emails across 6 days) show:
* combination of postscreen and other upstream tests are catching
true baddies enough that the VALIDITY_RPBL does not catch any for me
* VALIDITY_SAFE and VALIDITY_CERTIFIED hit on about 5% of total
emails (96)
On 05.04.25 10:09, Greg Troxel wrote:
Does anybody find incoming mail that is VALIDITY_SAFE but not
VALIDITY_CERTIFIED?
I have checked a few servers I maintain, some of them seem to always
get matches for both, some don't.
I used to get such mail, and it was in part spam, I think because SAFE
allowed "single opt in" otherwise known as "list owner just added you
saying you somehow signed up".
But now, I find that if either SAFE or CERTIFIED hits, both do.
I'd like to ask Andrew to adjust the Validity website to provide an
easy to find, clear explanation of the semantics of the RBLs. I went
to the URL in the config file and just got marketing text.
I'd like Andrew to explain if there is (still) any point to SAFE and
CERTIFIED being separate.
Given the very low query limits, and others comments, it seems like SA
should drop SAFE and RPBL.
Most of hits I got were from RPBL.
That one has positive score, so it's more a spam indicator.
I'm unclear on SA doctrine for included lists, but the Validity list
limits seem too low even for single-person personal sites. Perhaps
now with blocked codes and a way that queries are disabled for a while
if blocked, we're ok with that.
Maybe not a single-person host, but even a small company can cross
this limit easily. 10k e-mails in 30 days is 333 mails a day, which is
quite low number.
Divide that by 3 as there are 3 queries per email and the limit is the
number of queries and not emails, so 111 emails per day.
After checking on multiple hosts I have disabled lookups on some of
them because they were producing _BLOCKED responses.
