Spam Filter ISP Forums : SFDB Problem

Spam Filter ISP Forums : SFDB Problem https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/ Fri, 12 Jun 2026 01:06:32 +0000 Wed, 17 May 2006 18:00:25 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 11.04 360 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=5607 <![CDATA[Spam Filter ISP Forums]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_images/web_wiz_forums.png https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/ <![CDATA[SFDB Problem : OK, I've added dynablock.njabl.org...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8038&title=sfdb-problem#8038 Author: Guests
Subject: 5607
Posted: 17 May 2006 at 6:00pm

OK, I've added dynablock.njabl.org to the end of my list and try to keep an eye on it.

Thank you Dan, Stephen.

]]> Wed, 17 May 2006 18:00:25 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8038&title=sfdb-problem#8038 <![CDATA[SFDB Problem : Roman, For what it's worth,...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8037&title=sfdb-problem#8037 Author: Desperado
Subject: 5607
Posted: 17 May 2006 at 5:20pm

Roman,

For what it's worth, I find the combined.njabl.org to be very good. AND, they report nicely which list caused the listing. I have had no known or at least chronic issues.

]]> Wed, 17 May 2006 17:20:30 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8037&title=sfdb-problem#8037 <![CDATA[SFDB Problem : I'm actually not using it...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8036&title=sfdb-problem#8036 Author: sgeorge
Subject: 5607
Posted: 17 May 2006 at 4:48pm

I'm actually not using it as "combined" anymore. At the time of that post I had just added some aggressive settings to my MAPS blacklist. I was unhappy with the number of false positives I was receiving - but I can't recall whether the falses where on account of njabl or another list. Afterwards, I "cheated" bit:

I set my min MAPS matches from "1" to "2"
I intentionally used dnsbl.njabl.org and dynablock.njabl.org instead of combined.njabl.org
And I intentionally used sbl.spamhaus.org and xbl.spamhaus.org instead of sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org
and used a few other servers (bl.spamcop.net and dnsbl.sorbs.net)
...My MAPS false positives ended up reducing greatly

I'm not proud of intentionally adding extra queries to these free services - that's why I'm going to give your settings a spin for myself and see if I'm satisifed with the number of false positives (or lack thereof, to be exact).

Stephen
]]> Wed, 17 May 2006 16:48:04 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8036&title=sfdb-problem#8036 <![CDATA[SFDB Problem : It looks like they've turned...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8034&title=sfdb-problem#8034 Author: Guests
Subject: 5607
Posted: 17 May 2006 at 4:01pm

It looks like they've turned servers on for a short period of time :)

Good for me they didn't start returning positive answer for every query...

BTW, Stephen, I've read your topic, how is combined.njabl.org going?

]]> Wed, 17 May 2006 16:01:48 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8034&title=sfdb-problem#8034 <![CDATA[SFDB Problem : Yeah, what's interesting...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8033&title=sfdb-problem#8033 Author: sgeorge
Subject: 5607
Posted: 17 May 2006 at 3:08pm

Yeah, what's interesting is that since you successfully connected to them in March, they must have died, come back, and died again. I first noticed that they were down in January, when I posted this:

http://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID= 5450&KW=sgeorge

...That may mean that they may come back in the future, perhaps(?)
Mysterious bunch, those dnsrbl folks...

Stephen
]]> Wed, 17 May 2006 15:08:04 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8033&title=sfdb-problem#8033 <![CDATA[SFDB Problem : Hmm, you are right, Stephen.I...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8031&title=sfdb-problem#8031 Author: Guests
Subject: 5607
Posted: 17 May 2006 at 2:58pm

Hmm, you are right, Stephen. I didn't keep an eye on them. The last hit was in March and there is no answer from their servers now.]]> Wed, 17 May 2006 14:58:10 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8031&title=sfdb-problem#8031 <![CDATA[SFDB Problem : Roman, thanks for your MAPS lists...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8027&title=sfdb-problem#8027 Author: sgeorge
Subject: 5607
Posted: 17 May 2006 at 1:37pm

Roman, thanks for your MAPS lists - I'm going to try it out for a little while and see if I have the same kind of success.

But, did you really get 3 results from spam.dnsrbl.net? I've foundthem to be down for quite a while. In fact, I just checked DNS recordsfor dnsrbl.net - there doesn't seem to be anything there...

Stephen]]> Wed, 17 May 2006 13:37:56 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=8027&title=sfdb-problem#8027 <![CDATA[SFDB Problem : Actually I don't see the...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=7980&title=sfdb-problem#7980 Author: Roman
Subject: 5607
Posted: 12 May 2006 at 10:23am

Actually I don't see the very big reason to query SFDB for foreign RBL, MX or PTR checks - you can do it locally, keep it under your own control and don't depend on inaccurate\aggressive SFDB submitters.]]> Fri, 12 May 2006 10:23:31 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=7980&title=sfdb-problem#7980 <![CDATA[SFDB Problem : Roman is right on target. We've...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=7977&title=sfdb-problem#7977 Author: pcmatt
Subject: 5607
Posted: 11 May 2006 at 10:24pm

Roman is right on target. We've experienced the same results.

Nobody should use the spam.dnsbl.sorbs.net or the dnsbl.sorbs.net aggragate list at this time because it is the sorbs admin's private aggressive block list.

I don't think they ever remove an IP that gets on that list. It is not helpful at all to the SFDB feature if anyone of us is using this list. Roman's list of good sorbs lists matches our obvservations in the past few years.

]]> Thu, 11 May 2006 22:24:32 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=7977&title=sfdb-problem#7977 <![CDATA[SFDB Problem : Dan, by my expirience you should...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=7969&title=sfdb-problem#7969 Author: Roman
Subject: 5607
Posted: 10 May 2006 at 9:19pm

Dan, by my expirience you should defenetly keep out from spam.dnsbl.sorbs.net which acc. to http://www.us.sorbs.net/using.shtml "...contains netblocks of spam supporting service providers, including those who provide websites, DNS or drop boxes for a spammer..." and is included in aggr. dnsbl.sorbs.net. All others are seem to be OK (for me). Actually I test my new set of zones for about 2 months now and the current numbers for that period are:

Hits/zone
8178     sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org
5800     dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net
1045     bl.spamcop.net
96     web.dnsbl.sorbs.net
80     dnsbl.njabl.org
11     socks.dnsbl.sorbs.net
3     spam.dnsrbl.net
3     http.dnsbl.sorbs.net
0     rhsbl.sorbs.net
0     misc.dnsbl.sorbs.net
0     smtp.dnsbl.sorbs.net]]> Wed, 10 May 2006 21:19:47 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=5607&PID=7969&title=sfdb-problem#7969