[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [suse-security] *****SPAM***** Tuerkei in die EU



Rainer Duffner schreef:

>> in general blocking ips isnt the best and blocking dynamic ips is more
>> then a stupid idea.
> to the contrary.
> Why would a dynamic IP need to talk to my mailserver directly?

Because some IP ranges are listed as being dynamic, but really are
static? It depends heavily on your definition of 'dynamic IP' and the
DUL list you're using.

> It's a zombie with almost 100% probability (and the rest are clueless
> idiots or broken software).
> 10-20% of my RBL-hits are dynamic ips.

I know a few RBLs which list the full IPv4 and IPv6 address space and
would be good spamfilters by your perception of a suitable RBL (they
would block all your mail). One shouldn't look at the good negatives,
but rather to the false positives. It is my experience that the number
of false positives is unacceptably high when IP's listed as 'dynamic'
are outright blocked. I do use DUL lists in SA scoring however, since
the probability that a message *is* indeed spam, is higher (but nowhere
near 100%).

Best regards,
Arjen

-- 
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands, e-mail: suse-security-help@xxxxxxxx
Security-related bug reports go to security@xxxxxxx, not here