The question Brian raised is not the percentage of spam that blacklists catch,
it's the false positive rate.
The core problem with blacklists is that they attempted to impose
accountability on others without accepting accountability themselves. Some
blacklist perpetrators even boasted about their use of 'collateral damage' as a
means of blackmailing ISPs to comply with their demands.
Blacklists are certainly still used as a part of commercial spam reduction
systems but they are now only one input amongst many and they are not used for
a binary go/no-go decision.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Finch [mailto:dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:08 AM
To: Brian E Carpenter
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Identifications dealing with Bulk Unsolicited
Messages (BUMs)
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Blacklists at the level of sending domains (or reputation
systems that
function like blacklists) are a failure.
I was talking about IP address blacklists. Perhaps 90% was a
bit over-optimistic - my stats from cam.ac.uk show more than
80% of spam dealt with by DNS blacklists and another 10% with
a few other simple checks.
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> http://dotat.at/ VIKING NORTH
UTSIRE: SOUTHEAST 6 TO GALE 8. ROUGH OR VERY ROUGH,
OCCASIONALLY HIGH. OCCASIONAL RAIN OR SLEET. MODERATE OR POOR.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf