OT: Spamcop BL - good or dangerous?

[Gerard Seibert]

On Wednesday November 29, 2006 at 07:11:36 (AM) Paul Kelly :: Blacknight Solutions wrote:

> Gerard Seibert wrote:
> > On Wednesday November 29, 2006 at 06:21:54 (AM) Arthur Sherman wrote:
> > 
> >> Sometimes I get a message from any of lists I'm subscribed to, that mail to
> >> my address bounces.
> >> And as a reason I see Spamcop blocking sender's (legitimate) server.
> >>
> >> Here comes the question:
> >> What would you use instead of Spamcop?
> >> It gotta be free service, and the more lists the better: right now, Spamcop
> >> is #1 blocking BL in the logs.
> >> I am afraid if I drop it, the blocking will be worse.
> > 
> > 
> > SpamCop does not block legitimate servers. I use SpamCop myself.
> 
> I'm sorry, but that is complete rubbish. SpamCop users blatantly report
> every and any e-mail they receive even double opt-in mailing lists etc.
> It is an extremely dangerous BL to use if you wish to get legitimate e-mail.
> 
> The only rbl of use (at smtp transaction time) is xbl. Anything else
> will drop legitimate mail, that is a fact.
> 
> We host 16k domains, of which we're scanning around 5000 for spam and
> other nasties. We see 200k mails a day through mailscanner with a factor
> of 5 being rejected at smtp time by xbl.
> 
> We use spamcop in SA to add a few points to the spam score, we've found
> that this is the only use for spamcop today. Anything else results in
> users complaining on a daily basis that mail is being lost.
> 
> Bottom line, Spamcop should not be used by ISP's, HSP's at a bare
> minimum at smtp time and for the rest of the people who admin their own
> mail servers I would highly recommend not using it. xbl is extremely
> safe to use.


You are missing the point here. The OP has a misconfigured mailserver.
That is the primary cause of his/her problems. Correct that problem then
see what transpires. Given the way they are sending mail, there is a
good chance that they will be blocked by more than just SpamCop.


-- 
Gerard