RE: [cobalt-users] excessive spam

["Ian" <cobalt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 14 Jul 2003 at 15:29, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight  wrote:

> 
> >> Michele Neylon :: Blacknight Solutions
> >> Blocking IPs, by the way, is a waste of time.
> >
> > Really? That's how most of the DNSBL's work. If you block 68.56.0.0/16
> > you'll reject a ton of open proxy spam from Comcast users. RR.com was
> > nice enough to send me their list of DHCP addresses.
> 
> I was referring to individual IPs. Using RDBLs etc., is a lot more dynamic
> and useful. For example, if you were hooked up to Spamcop you would block
> the IPs currently in the database and ONLY those IPs. If you were to dump
> a load of IPs into your sendmail config and block them you could end up:
> 1. Blocking IPs that are either no longer active and/or no longer guilty
> of spamming
> 
> 
> 2. You wouldn't block any new IPs
> 
> We use spamcop with infinite monkeys and have a very high success rate.

Same here, both in sendmail and mailscanner, just in case any slip 
through.

I have also set up a basic perl script to scan yesterdays maillog and 
generate a report of the rejected IPs/domains.  Just in case any 
customers have been blocked, none so far.

Ian
--