RBL for spam filtering

From: Joseph S Barrera III (joe@barrera.org)
Date: Sun Apr 22 2001 - 08:14:36 PDT

Any thoughts on using RBL for spam filtering on FoRK?

- Joe

Also sprach Oliver Xymoron:
> Way back on Thu, 14 Dec 2000, I wrote:
> > WASTE used to rely on the MAPS Realtime Blackhole List[1] to do spam
> > filtering. As of a couple minutes ago, I've turned it off as their
> > policies have gone well beyond obnoxious. See this article[2] by Jamie
> > Mccarthy for more detail.
> >
> > [1] http://mail-abuse.org/rbl/
> > [2] http://slashdot.org/yro/00/12/13/1853237.shtml
> ..and we started getting ever more and more spam (I've been getting about
> 20-40 a day, not counting the stuff I filter myself). So we have a
> dilemma: deal with ridiculous amounts of spam, or be part of a spam
> filtering network that occassionally blackholes innocent people.
> On Tuesday, I reenabled RBL filtering. My current thinking is that the
> worst part of the RBL is the network route blackholing, which makes all
> traffic (not just mail) disappear, as it shuts off both directions of
> communication. Using simple mail filtering, RBL is probably more bad than
> good. There's also currently no alternative that's less problematic while
> still being effective.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 29 2001 - 20:26:05 PDT