|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > spamassassin-dev archives|
--- Comment #33 from Kevin A. McGrail <firstname.lastname@example.org> 2011-12-13 00:08:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #32)
> Just to add my 2c....
> KAM: This was discussed before with regards to URIBL doing the same stuff, see
> URIBL still has the ability to return 127.0.0.255 for all queries as per their
> 'abuse' page. See http://uribl.com/about.shtml#abuse and were returning
> positive for queries from Google DNS about 3-4 weeks ago (AXB can probably
> confirm this).
> Personally I think it would be a shame to loose either list from the default
> rulesets despite these practices.
It's good to mention this because we need to implement it the same for URIBL.
My understanding back like 2 years ago was that URIBL changed to a block of the
query and not to return false positives.
I can tell you that I have nothing on my public NS for URIBL that gives out FP
answers. I do have the rbldnsd ACL implemented which I believe does interfere
but only in a blocking/pretend there is no data way.
Blocking/pretending no data for queries is considered acceptable, I believe.
AXB, can you confirm otherwise?
-- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.