On Thursday, August 3, 2006, 7:40:57 AM, Andrzej Filip wrote: > Make *clear* distiction between thre basic ways of using spmacop.net
Correct: spamcop.net has multiple functions. > 1) email blocking at MTA level [may be controversial cause of "zero+ > tolerance"] Not recommended. Too many FPs to block outright using the SpamCop BL at the MTA level. > 2) scoring by SpamAssassin [score may be decreased or zeroed] Excellent use for it since SA gives it an appropriately low score for the FP level in the SpamCop BL. They way you get the benefits of the fairly aggressive correct hits, but not much aggravation from the FPs. > 3) spam *reporting* (automatization of sending LARTs) [*I recomend it*] Also recommended here. Reporting spam using SpamCop gets some spams blocked using the SpamCop BL. But it also gets them blacklisted using the SURBL SC list, which is very effective and has additional processing and whitelisting so it doesn't FP like SpamCop's own IP BL does: http://www.surbl.org/lists.html#sc Therefore, please report spams using SpamCop. It's worth mentioning that despite the munging SpamCop does to try to not be a confirmation loop for spammers, using SpamCop may result in some more spam due to that effect. There is also a "mole" option you can set in SpamCop that does not report, just blacklists. Jeff C. -- Jeff Chan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.surbl.org/
