jdow wrote:
>
>> rbl/uribl overlap.
>
> Matt, I think your worry about overlap is faulty. If the lists all
> fed off one common database it would be a worry. Then the correlation
> would be a symptom of the system not working. If they all work off
> more or less individual captures and submissions their raw databases
> have low correlation. If their results correlate well, as in "overlap"
> as you are using it, that is an indication of their goodness.
Yes, but the frequency of overlap in nonspam that I'm seeing at my site
is disturbing.
I've posted examples of this, and they keep getting ignored.
This IS a real problem. I am not speculating. I've posted two real
domains on this list that have had the problem for me in the past 7 days.
ultraedit-updates.com: OB + uribl black (delisted from both at my
request)
winterizewithscotts.com: OB + uribl black (I have intentionally NOT
submitted a delist request for this domain)
I don't know how you people can sit there, stare reality in the face,
then tell me I'm worried over something that doesn't exist.
What level of FP problem is going to make you guys wake up on this? Do I
have to come up with a list of 1000 domains before you'll accept reality?
Nonspam overlap in the URBLS is a real problem. No really, it's real.
I'm not making this up.
If you guys want to continue to pretend the problem doesn't exist, so be
it. I'll adjust my own scores. But don't say I didn't warn you when you
get bit in the ass by this later.
>
>
> For your worries what I might do is go out and look at which databases
> are filled mostly or exclusively from spam traps and rate them highly
> while rating those that rely solely on submissions low.
Yes, but the only list that's pure spamtrap is JP. Everything else is mixed:
AB, SC - spamcop reports + spamtraps
WS - manual web reports + spamtraps
OB - outblaze user reports + spamtraps
URIBL - manual web reports + spamtraps
> And the existing scores seem to indicate "it's already been done." You
> may be running too
> many of the submission based BLs, though. (SA may default badly in that
> regard.)
>
> So stated bluntly, the lists do overlap. "So what?" They are SUPPOSED to
> overlap for a spam source, if it really is a spam source.
Yes, I agree... I don't care if they overlap in general. I've said that
about 100 times in this thread.
But why do they so commonly overlap in NONSPAM too? And why does nobody
care? Why does everyone insist the problem doesn't exist in spite of
examples to the contrary.
At my site, the URBLs overlap. Period. They have overlapping spam hits,
and they have overlapping FPs. The first half isn't a problem, but the
second half IS.
I've seen nonspam overlaps between URIBL, WS, OB and JP in all sorts of
random mixtures. Most commonly URIBL_BLACK + OB or URIBL_BLACK+WS, but
I've seen some WS+OB and OB+JP before too.
