Fwd: Latest RBLs to use

Matt Kettler mkettler at evi-inc.com
Thu Mar 9 18:12:55 GMT 2006

Max Kipness wrote:
> Hello -
> I'm in the process of installing the latest version of MailScanner. I haven't
> set one up in a while and was wondering which ones people are using nowadays.
> Years ago I think I had setup a long list of them. With SURBL is this necessary
> now? Or just let SpamAssassin handle it?

IMHO, it's never been a good idea to use RBLs at the MailScanner or MTA level.

However, that belief comes from never finding a RBL with a S/O greater than or
equal to five-nines (>99.999% of matching email is spam, and <0.001% is
nonspam). I'm generally quite averse to FPs, and adding another source of them
on top of the occasional SA FP is troublesome.

That said, XBL does have an impressive S/O in the SA development testing. SBL
and DSBL also perform fairly well, though not as well as XBL. (take a look at
STATISTICS-set1.txt and STATISTICS-set3.txt  out of the SA tarball sometime)

More information about the MailScanner mailing list