Charles Gregory a écrit : > On Mon, 22 Jun 2009, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote: >> Really? Personally I find the PBL just kicks its ass. > > When I did my research for setting up RBL's, I found old comparisons > between RBL's that seemed to indicate that the spamhaus PBL and the > spamcop lists had slightly higher levels of flase postives.
stop spreading FUD. if you know of false positives, show us so that we see what you exactly mean. a lot of people, including $self, use the PBL at smtp time. > Not 'bad', > but just poor enough that I prefer to give PBL a weighted score in SA > rather than run it as a poison pill in the MTA. Though with everything > I've been seeing lately, I'm darned tempted to ramp it up. Especially if > sorbs DUL list is going to go bye-bye.... > > Perhaps it is time to do some new comparisons? Does anyone have some > stats on the effectiveness of various RBL's versus the FP rate? at this time, zen is _the_ list. > Presumably the scoring defaults in SA are somehow based on this, but I > wouldn't mind being able to decide for myself. Unfortunately, the > privacy regs prevent me from keeping a good corpus here and doing my own > tests..... despite the privacy "regs" here (and not only because of regs. I am extremely attached to privacy), I have no problem keeping a corpus of spam from one hand, and a list of IPs that sent "other" mail.
