Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Postscreen and exceptions

Expand Messages
  • Wietse Venema
    ... Read their blocklist policy. I use it, thusly: postscreen_dnsbl_sites = zen.spamhaus.org*2 bl.spamcop.net*1 b.barracudacentral.org*1
    Message 1 of 28 , Jan 6, 2013
      Jos Chrispijn:
      >
      > Wietse Venema:
      > > Don't use spamcop, or use it only with small weight in a scoring
      > > system. Wietse
      >
      > What is your concern about Spamcop?

      Read their blocklist policy.

      I use it, thusly:

      postscreen_dnsbl_sites = zen.spamhaus.org*2
      bl.spamcop.net*1 b.barracudacentral.org*1
      postscreen_dnsbl_threshold = 2

      Wietse
    • John Levine
      ... I agree that Spamcop used to be awful, with vast numbers of false alarms. But since Ironport bought them several years ago, there s been a nearly complete
      Message 2 of 28 , Jan 6, 2013
        >Don't use spamcop, or use it only with small weight in a scoring system.

        I agree that Spamcop used to be awful, with vast numbers of false
        alarms. But since Ironport bought them several years ago, there's
        been a nearly complete turnover of staff and it's much better run.

        Take another look. I find its false positive rates down with
        Spamhaus' now.

        R's,
        John
      • Noel Jones
        ... Glad it works for you. Please keep in mind the original question of this discussion was how to allow wanted mail blocked by spamcop. The way to achieve
        Message 3 of 28 , Jan 6, 2013
          On 1/6/2013 11:29 AM, John Levine wrote:
          >> Don't use spamcop, or use it only with small weight in a scoring system.
          >
          > I agree that Spamcop used to be awful, with vast numbers of false
          > alarms. But since Ironport bought them several years ago, there's
          > been a nearly complete turnover of staff and it's much better run.
          >
          > Take another look. I find its false positive rates down with
          > Spamhaus' now.
          >
          > R's,
          > John
          >

          Glad it works for you.

          Please keep in mind the original question of this discussion was how
          to allow wanted mail blocked by spamcop.

          The way to achieve that goal is by using a scoring system, as
          recommended by the spamcop documentation.

          Clearly the current, vastly improved, false positive rate is still
          not acceptable for everyone.



          -- Noel Jones
        • Ron Guerin
          ... I presume you re not talking about the Spamhaus DBL, which is quite awful. - Ron
          Message 4 of 28 , Jan 6, 2013
            On 01/06/2013 12:29 PM, John Levine wrote:
            >> Don't use spamcop, or use it only with small weight in a scoring system.
            >
            > I agree that Spamcop used to be awful, with vast numbers of false
            > alarms. But since Ironport bought them several years ago, there's
            > been a nearly complete turnover of staff and it's much better run.
            >
            > Take another look. I find its false positive rates down with
            > Spamhaus' now.

            I presume you're not talking about the Spamhaus DBL, which is quite awful.

            - Ron
          • Stan Hoeppner
            ... Since the DBL is an RHSBL, not DNSBL, it cannot be used with postscreen, which is the topic of this thread. Discussion of the merits of [DNS|RHS]BLs is
            Message 5 of 28 , Jan 6, 2013
              On 1/6/2013 6:18 PM, Ron Guerin wrote:
              > On 01/06/2013 12:29 PM, John Levine wrote:
              >>> Don't use spamcop, or use it only with small weight in a scoring system.
              >>
              >> I agree that Spamcop used to be awful, with vast numbers of false
              >> alarms. But since Ironport bought them several years ago, there's
              >> been a nearly complete turnover of staff and it's much better run.
              >>
              >> Take another look. I find its false positive rates down with
              >> Spamhaus' now.
              >
              > I presume you're not talking about the Spamhaus DBL, which is quite awful.

              Since the DBL is an RHSBL, not DNSBL, it cannot be used with postscreen,
              which is the topic of this thread. Discussion of the merits of
              [DNS|RHS]BLs is off topic on the postfix list, thus I don't desire to
              create a long OT thread, but I am curious as to why you feel the DBL is
              awful. I've had no problems using it for direct rejections with these
              restrictions:

              reject_rhsbl_reverse_client dbl.spamhaus.org
              reject_rhsbl_sender dbl.spamhaus.org
              reject_rhsbl_helo dbl.spamhaus.org

              No FPs do date.

              --
              Stan
            • Benny Pedersen
              ... http://www.dnswl.org/tech see more on permit_dnswl_client it does not need to be specific dnswl.org as dnsbl/dnswl, its just an good example on postfix
              Message 6 of 28 , Jan 7, 2013
                Noel Jones skrev den 2013-01-06 19:40:

                > Clearly the current, vastly improved, false positive rate is still
                > not acceptable for everyone.

                http://www.dnswl.org/tech see more on permit_dnswl_client

                it does not need to be specific dnswl.org as dnsbl/dnswl, its just an
                good example on postfix config
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.