RBL

[Remco Barendse]

Isn't that what DCC is doing, more or less?

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003, David While wrote:

> My plan was that the IP address would have to be reported by more than one client before it got added.
>
> David While
>
>       -----Original Message-----
>       From: Raymond Dijkxhoorn [mailto:raymond at PROLOCATION.NET]
>       Sent: Sun 07/09/2003 11:01
>       To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
>       Cc:
>       Subject: Re: RBL
>
>
>
>       Hi!
>
>       > my mailstats program analyses the log file produced by MailScanner. If
>       > an email is marked as spam by MailScanner (however it is configured) is
>       > added to the list using an algorithm. The sender has to send more than
>       > one in a certain time period before it gets added.
>
>       k.
>
>       > Currently my set up only uses SpamAssassin to mark mails as spam so it
>       > is not relying on other RBLs (except in that SpamAssassin uses them but
>       > if it didn't it would still work). The most common SpamAssassin trap is
>       > the Bayes system at the moment.
>
>       What about false positives ? They automaticly also get added. Not saying
>       its bad, but just a thought. What would be nice is a inter face for the
>       RBL where you could see the 'spam', headers/text and approve it to going
>       on the list.
>
>       If we havea couple of people watching over the output that should be
>       do-able and more reliable...
>
>       Else its depending on everyones site settings whats in the RBL. If i
>       decide to filter all english messages, since we only want to get dutch
>       mail, that would be nasty :)
>
>       Bye,
>       Raymond.
>
>
>