spamassassin-users June 2010 archive
Main Archive Page > Month Archives  > spamassassin-users archives
spamassassin-users: Re: Should Spamhaus default to disabled?

Re: Should Spamhaus default to disabled?

From: Michael Scheidell <scheidell_at_nospam>
Date: Fri Jun 11 2010 - 15:10:53 GMT

On 6/11/10 10:42 AM, Andy Dills wrote:
> We felt the amount of money being asked for was unreasonable, as we felt
> we likely wouldn't see an increase in spam if we turned them off.
should I mention that the (optional) reputation based (which is
supported in SA 3.3.x) is really CHEAP?
(no, I don't work for them, don't own part of them, don't get
commissions from them, and yes, you need to download and recompile a
new dccd client/and/or server)
If you do less than 100K in queries per day (100K passing through SA),
you don't even need to run your own servers. > 100K, the bandwidth would
suggest that you would want to run one or more caching DCC servers in
your network.

I would use spamhaus if their costs were similar to rhyolites for the
commercial dcc.


(yes, spamhaus, when you told us we were in non-compliance, we tried,
several times to contact you to try to license it, and we got ignored.
we only know of the costs via third parties who reported it. we admin
we have no direct knowledge of the costs because you never responded to
our requests for pricing)

look at the DCC rules for a hint at the new features.

-- Michael Scheidell, CTO Phone: 561-999-5000, x 1259 > *| *SECNAP Network Security Corporation * Certified SNORT Integrator * 2008-9 Hot Company Award Winner, World Executive Alliance * Five-Star Partner Program 2009, VARBusiness * Best Anti-Spam Product 2008, Network Products Guide * King of Spam Filters, SC Magazine 2008 ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned and certified safe by SpammerTrap(r). For Information please see ______________________________________________________________________