Continuing the War on Spam
I implemented several spam blacklists today. Take a look at them (and the statistics of their filtering abilities thus far) over here on the main ServerForest site. The SPAM/Success ration is off at the moment since the successes include spam prior to the filter implementation today (the log goes back several days), but that will correct itself in the next few days. If this kind of thing interests you, check back, those stats are updated every hour, five minutes after the hour.
Also, if you have suggestions of other blacklists I should include, or a complaint about the accuracy of any I've already included, please let me know in the comments. Thanks!
As an aside, if you are presently a ServerForest customer, and you did not receive a notice with three important news items tonight, please let me know and I will send you a new copy.
Join the Conversation
RE: Continuing the War on Spam
Just don’t use the spamcop list.
Are you sharing which blacklists you’re using that or keeping it secret?
RE: Continuing the War on Spam
Well, it may not be wise, but I’m presently sharing them at that address linked to in the post (click the “here” in the second paragraph). Let me know what you think and if you have any suggestions.
I’m not using Spamcop presently, I heard it is a bit aggressive. SA uses it, however, as one of its methods of considering spam, so it still is used if the user so chooses (via cPanel, that is), but not in a way that bounces mail.
BTW, do you think it is a bad idea to publish which blacklists one is using? My feeling is that I’m small enough I doubt spammers are going to take a lot of time to check into such stuff about my server…
RE: Continuing the War on Spam
Up to a point it won’t matter if you advertise your blocklists. The majority of spamming IPs are listed on just about every list. There are a core group of about 2 dozen heavyweights who move around, but are usually identified within 24 hours of leasing a new IP. Frankly, most of them spew from IPs in certain countries friendly to spammers: China, Korea, Pakistan, Brazil, etc. Many lists block e-mail from whole countries. There is a rising group of spammers taking advantage of zombie arrays created by viruses, but those are usually listed as IPs that have no business running a mail server: home users without a proper business contract, etc.
RE: Continuing the War on Spam
Yeah, good point Ed. I was blocking using “DUL” (dynamic users list) that blocked e-mail coming from dynamic IP addresses, although I already received a request from one user that I not do that… he hosts his own Linux server at home.
We’ll see, if I find that the others aren’t doing the trick, maybe I’ll reactivate it.
RE: Continuing the War on Spam
Sad, isn’t it? Philosophically I support the idea of FOSS users with a static IP running their own mail server, simply because they can. But because I know that translates to a high probability of spamming, I am forced to oppose it.
RE: Continuing the War on Spam
Yeah, it is. :-\