spamassassin-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ed Abbott <websiterepair...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: False Positive on Domain Name
Date Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:50:12 GMT



Kris Deugau wrote:
> 
> 
> A few remote rules rely on other remote lookups (eg, Vipul's Razor, DCC,
> pyzor) but the stock DNS-based rules alone can catch somewhere up to
> about 85-90% of the spam all by themselves, in my experience.  And the
> non-DNS rules still rely on DNS lookups to be able to connect to the
> right remote system.
> 
> -kgd
> 
> 

Thank you for your comment on the effectiveness of DNS-based rules.
85-90% is a lot of spam to catch!

I've been relying on local rules only, many of which I've written myself.
Local rules work well if there is something specific I can target, such
as an 800 number.

Non-local rules should work particularly well for me as I only check my
email 1-3 times a day.  Therefore, an offending IP address will likely
have been reported by the time I check email.  That's what I'm thinking.

Of course, you never get 100 percent.  However, catching most spam
is very very helpful.

Ed Abbiott
-- 
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/False-Positive-on-Domain-Name-tp33975030p33979059.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message