Re: what are the criteria for being listed in sa-blacklist.current?

[Jeff Chan <je...@surbl.org>]

Quoting Per Jessen <pe...@computer.org>:

> Matt Kettler wrote:
>
>>> For some reason one of my domains has all of a sudden been listed in
>>> the above listed db. Which is rather ironic since there are only 3
>>> active accounts at this domain. 1 used for a couple of mailing lists,
>>> 1 - postmaster (inbound email only) and 1 domain contact address for
>>> domains (also inbound only).
>> This really shouldn't matter.. *NOBODY* should be using this list.
>> It's too large and too hardware intensive, and too inaccurate to be
>> useful.
>
> I don't use it, but it could very easily be turned into an rbldnsd
> format list - I'm surprised nobody's done that yet.  (assuming there's
> some actual use for the list).

sa-blacklist is the basis of ws.surbl.org:

   http://www.surbl.org/lists.html#ws

sa-blacklist is deprecated.  Use SURBLs instead.

Jeff C.

Re: what are the criteria for being listed in sa-blacklist.current?

[Per Jessen <pe...@computer.org>]

Jeff Chan wrote:

> Quoting Per Jessen <pe...@computer.org>:
>> I don't use it, but it could very easily be turned into an rbldnsd
>> format list - I'm surprised nobody's done that yet.  (assuming
>> there's some actual use for the list).
> 
> sa-blacklist is the basis of ws.surbl.org:
> 
>    http://www.surbl.org/lists.html#ws
> 
> sa-blacklist is deprecated.  Use SURBLs instead.

Ah, there it is.  I guess I should have known that :-) 
It does make me wonder why the sa-blacklist config files are still being
published - I guess the whole thing is running on automatic, but maybe
Will Stearns pops into to check on it every other year?



/Per Jessen, Zürich

Re: what are the criteria for being listed in sa-blacklist.current?

[Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>]

Jeff Chan wrote:
> Quoting Per Jessen <pe...@computer.org>:
>
>> Matt Kettler wrote:
>>
>>>> For some reason one of my domains has all of a sudden been listed in
>>>> the above listed db. Which is rather ironic since there are only 3
>>>> active accounts at this domain. 1 used for a couple of mailing lists,
>>>> 1 - postmaster (inbound email only) and 1 domain contact address for
>>>> domains (also inbound only).
>>> This really shouldn't matter.. *NOBODY* should be using this list.
>>> It's too large and too hardware intensive, and too inaccurate to be
>>> useful.
>>
>> I don't use it, but it could very easily be turned into an rbldnsd
>> format list - I'm surprised nobody's done that yet.  (assuming there's
>> some actual use for the list).
>
> sa-blacklist is the basis of ws.surbl.org:
>
>   http://www.surbl.org/lists.html#ws
No it's not.. well, not really.. surbl's WS is based on 
sa-blacklist-uri. That's got the same email stream as sa-blacklist, but 
the information gathered is different.
>
> sa-blacklist is deprecated.  Use SURBLs instead.
sa-blacklist has always been impractical by design ( it blacklists from 
addresses, not URIs).

However, the OP's problem isn't that he's using sa-blacklist, it's that 
someone he's trying to email is using it, and his domain is listed.