[SLL] Best list of RBLs?

[Glenn Stone]

On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 11:47:40AM -0700, Bill Campbell wrote:
>On Mon, May 16, 2005, Glenn Stone wrote:
>>On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 10:10:46AM -0700, Bill Campbell wrote:
>>>SpamCop's FP rate is pretty high, largely because they take
>>>reports from clueless Lusers too seriously.  I've seen them block
>>>one of our servers that handles technical mailing lists because
>>>one user reported a single spam that made its way through our
>>>rather draconian spam filters to the list (no spam filters are
>>>perfect, and the wetware moderator may occassionally make a
>>>mistake as well :-).
>>
>>How long ago was this?  The latest FAQ says they no longer list for a
>>single email... 
>
>It's been a while, and they may have fixed it.

That being the case, I think I'm going to go add SpamCop to my Postfix
config, as well as list.dsbl.org (based on Jules' post of the SpamAssassin
stats).  These stats were pretty well confirmed by a sample of 76 spam I got
at work over the last week; of the ones either SpamHaus or my personal
filtering system would not have caught, four were tagged by SpamCop and 2 by
DSBL.  Sure, it's a marginal increase, but I'm trying to get as close as I
can without going over, and with the one-shot false positive problem fixed,
and the fact that SpamCop automatically delists after 48 hours, I think I'll
be able to catch some of the drive-by (virus-based) spam without arbitrarily
excluding everybody with a dynamic IP.  

Somebody remind me in a week or two and I'll report back on what I came up
with.  

>Instead of giving money to found colleges to promote learning, why don't
>they pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting anybody from learning
>anything?  If it works as good as the Prohibition one did, why, in five
>years we would have the smartest race of people on earth.
>		-- The Best of Will Rogers

If only it were that simple. 

-- Glenn