Keno wrote: "We had really bad experiences with black lists, that's why we haven't integrated them into Spamato."
I agree that some block-lists are not so great. But some are very useful - e.g., SpamCop's block list is great at identifying recent zombies used in spam runs. It's not some crazy block-list that you can never get off of. There's a block-list from sites that generate backscatter (backscatterer.org) which lasts two weeks. Some lists never take people off of them (they're not so useful), others are more naturally dynamic (as long as no spams are viewed from the list, the entries "time out").
The point is, users should be allowed to configure which list(s) they want to use. SpamPal allows this. It's a great feature, since some users may want block-lists that are ultra conservative, others may prefer more liberal block-lists. There are even block-lists containing IPs of the URLs that are commonly in spams.
Keno, it sounds like you're biased against block-lists, and I'm saying that some are very useful and you should reconsider.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Well, yes, maybe I am biased :-). But: let's see. We will take a look at our old blacklist code and give it another try. Do you have a list of "good" blacklists you would like to see supported as a default?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
> Do you have a list of "good" blacklists you would like to see supported as a default?
"Good" is relative. Everyone will have an opinion, but like I said, you can check out SpamPal to see how they do it. Here's a link that give some insight into the better ones:
I was going to mention this also. But, is it possible to run SpamPal and Spamato at the same time? I would think it would create a huge mess trying to run duplicate proxy filtering systems for a single email client, but I thought I might as well ask if someone had tried it. :)
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Not sure, but generally it should work. You might also use Spamato4Thunderbird or Spamato4Outlook (depending on your email client of course) and use Spam Pal in combination, so only a single proxy.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hello,
I recently discovered Spamato while looking at extensions to Thunderbird. Looks great!
I was surprised to see that DNS Block Lists aren't used for spam detection.
If an IP of a zombie PC shows up in the Received lines, it's a very effective way to detect spam. Many spams come from zombies.
SpamCop has a block list; Spamhaus has several. SpamPal works this way. It's a very simple solution that only requires a DNS lookup.
Is there a plan to support DNS Block Lists in the future?
I too would like to see this - I was surprised to see it wasn't present also.
We had really bad experiences with black lists, that's why we haven't integrated them into Spamato.
Keno wrote: "We had really bad experiences with black lists, that's why we haven't integrated them into Spamato."
I agree that some block-lists are not so great. But some are very useful - e.g., SpamCop's block list is great at identifying recent zombies used in spam runs. It's not some crazy block-list that you can never get off of. There's a block-list from sites that generate backscatter (backscatterer.org) which lasts two weeks. Some lists never take people off of them (they're not so useful), others are more naturally dynamic (as long as no spams are viewed from the list, the entries "time out").
The point is, users should be allowed to configure which list(s) they want to use. SpamPal allows this. It's a great feature, since some users may want block-lists that are ultra conservative, others may prefer more liberal block-lists. There are even block-lists containing IPs of the URLs that are commonly in spams.
Keno, it sounds like you're biased against block-lists, and I'm saying that some are very useful and you should reconsider.
Well, yes, maybe I am biased :-). But: let's see. We will take a look at our old blacklist code and give it another try. Do you have a list of "good" blacklists you would like to see supported as a default?
kemil wrote:
> Do you have a list of "good" blacklists you would like to see supported as a default?
"Good" is relative. Everyone will have an opinion, but like I said, you can check out SpamPal to see how they do it. Here's a link that give some insight into the better ones:
http://www.spampal.org/usermanual/optimize.htm#i35
Thanks.
I was going to mention this also. But, is it possible to run SpamPal and Spamato at the same time? I would think it would create a huge mess trying to run duplicate proxy filtering systems for a single email client, but I thought I might as well ask if someone had tried it. :)
Not sure, but generally it should work. You might also use Spamato4Thunderbird or Spamato4Outlook (depending on your email client of course) and use Spam Pal in combination, so only a single proxy.