Print Page | Close Window

MAPS and SURBL servers suggestion

Printed From: LogSat Software
Category: Spam Filter ISP
Forum Name: Spam Filter ISP Support
Forum Description: General support for Spam Filter ISP
URL: http://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=7129
Printed Date: 20 May 2018 at 5:54am


Topic: MAPS and SURBL servers suggestion
Posted By: LogSat
Subject: MAPS and SURBL servers suggestion
Date Posted: 10 November 2015 at 6:23pm
A very good suggestion was made by one of our users to keep a sticky thread on the forum with a list of our suggestions for the MAPS and SURBL servers to be used in SpamFilter. We'll also keep the thread open for everyone to contribute.

For the MAPS servers, this is our current suggestion:
bl.spamcop.net, true
cbl.abuseat.org, true
zen.spamhaus.org, true
dnsbl-2.uceprotect.net, true

The last server from uceprotect.net can be a bit too aggressive for some users - only by testing it out you will find out if it's a good fit to your environment.

For the SURBL servers, this is the only one we use in our own live servert:
multi.surbl.org






-------------
Roberto Franceschetti

http://www.logsat.com" rel="nofollow - LogSat Software

http://www.logsat.com/sfi-spam-filter.asp" rel="nofollow - Spam Filter ISP



Replies:
Posted By: yapadu
Date Posted: 07 July 2016 at 8:01pm
In case anyone cares, according to http://www.abuseat.org/faq.html" rel="nofollow - this page cbl.abuseat.org is included in zen.spamhaus.org so you do not need to make calls to cbl.abuseat.org if you are using zen.



-------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am a user of SF, not an employee. Use any advice offered at your own risk.


Posted By: Garand
Date Posted: 28 October 2017 at 3:47am
That's a good suggestion indeed. I'm testing that server currently, still not decided if it fits my needs.


Posted By: yapadu
Date Posted: 12 April 2018 at 10:27pm
Just ran some performance numbers, when Spamhaus contacted us regarding renewing their service - with a major price jump.

Here are some lists we use and the false positive rates we see with each.

Invaluement - .20%
Spamhaus - .07%
SpamCop - 0.88%
UCE Protect - 1.75%

Clearly, Spamhaus has the lowest false positive rates.  We offer UCE Protect to customers who want to increase their level of protection at the risk of higher false positives and clearly they do have a much higher false positives rate.

If you use a list and have good results, please post it here.

How about the false positive rates of some other filters???

SFDE - 0.76%
SFDB - 0.09%


SPF Filter - 1.09% (this one always has a high false positive rate)




-------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am a user of SF, not an employee. Use any advice offered at your own risk.



Print Page | Close Window