OT: Spamcop BL - good or dangerous?

Arthur Sherman arturs at netvision.net.il
Wed Nov 29 15:57:45 GMT 2006

> >> 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.
> -- 
> Paul Kelly

Just as I thought.



Arthur Sherman


More information about the MailScanner mailing list