On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 11:33:00 GMT
Angel Rivera <angel@wolf.com> wrote:
> J C Lawrence writes:
>> Which are precisely the reasons I don't and won't do SPAM filtering
>> at the MTA. The potential cost of error is high, and almost all
>> ability to supervise and correct is lost.
> A lot of these problems are probably due to misconfigured tools.
Accepted, partially. Various RBLs have a tendency to mark associated
netblocks, which I find deceptive.
> I am a firm believer of RBLs and we use that as the first line of
> defense against spam. If it has come to the point where someone is on
> one of the RBLs we use-we need a break.
> To that we have added SpamAssassin in tagging mode. The few false
> positives that it catches are simply tagged and can be whitelisted.
I use RBLs, SpamAssasin, Razor, TMDA and a few privately developed
filters in concert at LDA time to assist in correct folder filing.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
