RE: Domain reputation

From: Murray S. Kucherawy <>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 13:19:44 -0700

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On Behalf Of Mauricio Tavares
> Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2011 12:04 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Domain reputation
> > Yes, whitelisting betters communication latency due to greylisting,
> > and can help avoid false positives.  The question is how an MTA
> > measures the "whitelistability" of signing domains.  Perhaps domains
> > that users often choose as targets, and seldom compare in
> > abuse-reports are good candidates for whitelisting.

I don't think MTAs should be doing any measuring as they often have too narrow a view. Rather, MTAs report data, and query other services for allow/deny instructions.

> Should that be used for white/blacklisting or more as another
> spam filtering weight/score?

I think we'll need layers. Due to the nature of SMTP, IP-level filtering (RBLs, firewalls, etc.) are far more effective than anything at the SMTP level, so there will be a layer of that before any content analysis or DKIM verification. However, all three of those need to be present in a site's toolbox. And those tools will interchange data to increase each other's accuracy.
Received on Thu Jun 09 2011 - 20:19:51 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Oct 29 2012 - 23:20:18 PST