Spam Filter ISP Support Forum

  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - MAPS Servers
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

MAPS Servers

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
kspare View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 26 January 2005
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 334
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kspare Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: MAPS Servers
    Posted: 28 August 2003 at 2:39pm

Do people mind sharing what they are using for maps servers sucessfully without alot of False positives at the same time catching alot of spam?

I myself am using the following:

site1=relays.ordb.org, true
site2=sbl.spamhaus.org, true
site3=spam.dnsrbl.net, true
site4=blackholes.easynet.nl, true
site5=dnsbl.njabl.org, true

Back to Top
dcook View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 31 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 174
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dcook Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 August 2003 at 9:01pm

Hi, we are using the following:

dnsbl.njabl.org, true
blackholes.easynet.nl, true
bl.spamcop.net, true
list.dsbl.org, true

Our results:

DNSBL Distribution (In Order Searched)

 

dnsbl.njabl.org:

 

4533

 

blackholes.easynet.nl:

 

2816

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

bl.spamcop.net:

 

978

 

list.dsbl.org:

 

53

Dwight

Back to Top
JimMeredith View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 27 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JimMeredith Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 September 2003 at 1:51am

Our current blacklists...

  • sbl.spamhaus.org
  • spam.dnsrbl.net
  • dun.dnsrbl.net
  • list.dsbl.org
  • bl.spamcop.net

The first three take a very conservative approach.  dsbl is aggressive by comparison, but is still far more conservative than a "spews" type of list.  The fifth position on our list is where we try out more aggressive blacklists, and see how many false positives (FPs) they generate over a short trial period.  That spot is occupied by SpamCop now, and has been for a while... they generate a handful of FPs, but so far it has been within acceptable limits for our users.

The fact that SpamFilter checks blacklists in the listed order means that "hit rate" is always going to be weighted heavily toward the first blacklists in the list.  And that's actually a good thing.  By ordering the blacklists according to their listing policies -- the more conservative blacklists at the top, the aggressive lists at the bottom -- it makes it much easier to test for FPs.  If our top blacklist SpamHaus says it's spam, you can bet your paycheck on it.  The remaining hits on the more aggressive blacklists near the bottom of the list can then be more easily evaluated for FPs.

In the past, I tried out another blacklist...

  • flowgoaway.com

This blacklist blocks legitimate opt-in ad mail, but flowgo is one of those companies that makes opt-in look bad.  The user ends up with far more mail than they expected.  Flowgo does have a legitimate, working unsubscribe capability... but we just got through training our users to NEVER click on "unsubscribe" links, and quite honestly, they can't always tell a flowgo ad from the rest.

My only reason for removing the flowgoaway blacklist lately is that it has become much less effective now than it was even just a few months ago.  Don't know why.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.234 seconds.