rblefftest: Other people's data

Qmail disussion list

These messages from the qmail discussion list.

Message one

From:     Markus Stumpf [mailto:aex-qmail@Space.Net]
Sent:     Thursday, September 30, 1999 10:45 PM
To:       David Harris
Cc:       qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Subject:  Re: How good is RBL at filtering spam?

On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 04:24:06PM -0400, David Harris wrote:
> > I'll run this for a few days and let the list know what I find.

While we're on some statistics:
I use the patch that denies MAIL FROM when the domain cannot be
resolved. I have modified tha patch a bit so it logs the denial and
the reason. I have grepped though the logfiles of one of our servers of
the last couple of days and counted the number of lines that contain
"tcpcontrol: ok" (still using and elder version; this should give a
fairly good approximation on injected mails via smtp), the number of
lines with permanent DNS rejects (address doesn't have an A or MX record
or does not exists). "soft" rejects (server errors, not auth) are not
included. The last column is the number of rejects due to MAPS rbl
(I'm using only this one).

  day       tcpcontrol ok   DNS perm rejects   RBL rejects
1999/10/23	21161	      74		63
1999/10/24	20077	      69		78
1999/10/25	65771	      25		76
1999/10/26	37812	      28		34
1999/10/27	22373	     102		31
1999/10/28	50850	     315		52
1999/10/29	22800	      79		41
1999/10/30	23521	      89		38

	\Maex

-- 
SpaceNet GmbH             |   http://www.Space.Net/   | Yeah, yo mama dresses
Research & Development    | mailto:maex-sig@Space.Net | you funny and you need
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 |  Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0    | a mouse to delete files
D-80807 Muenchen          |  Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299  |

Message two

From:     Peter Green [mailto:pcg@gospelcom.net]
Sent:     Friday, October 01, 1999 11:37 AM
To:       qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Subject:  Re: How good is RBL at filtering spam?

On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Markus Stumpf wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 04:24:06PM -0400, David Harris wrote:
> > > I'll run this for a few days and let the list know what I find.
> 
> While we're on some statistics:

I'll throw mine in, especially since I'm really happy with RBL:

  day       tcpcontrol ok   RBL rejects
1999/09/25     13726            871
1999/09/26     14506           1099
1999/09/27     31952           1112
1999/09/28     28585           1524
1999/09/29     42701            947
1999/09/30     60224           1103

/pg
-- 
Peter Green
Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin
pcg@gospelcom.net

Message three

From:     Alex Rubenstein [mailto:alex@nac.net]
Sent:     Friday, October 01, 1999 12:35 PM
To:       Peter Green
Cc:       qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Subject:  Re: How good is RBL at filtering spam?



Fyi, from mail.nac.net:

tempest:/var/log/mail$ zcat maillog.0.gz |grep smtpd | grep " ok " | wc -l
  111001

tempest:/var/log/mail$ zcat maillog.0.gz | grep smtpd | grep "BOUNCEMAIL" | wc -l
     100


You must be aimed at for spam more often then we are.

On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Peter Green wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Markus Stumpf wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 04:24:06PM -0400, David Harris wrote:
> > > > I'll run this for a few days and let the list know what I find.
> > 
> > While we're on some statistics:
> 
> I'll throw mine in, especially since I'm really happy with RBL:
> 
>   day       tcpcontrol ok   RBL rejects
> 1999/09/25     13726            871
> 1999/09/26     14506           1099
> 1999/09/27     31952           1112
> 1999/09/28     28585           1524
> 1999/09/29     42701            947
> 1999/09/30     60224           1103
> 
> /pg
> -- 
> Peter Green
> Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin
> pcg@gospelcom.net
> 
>