[Greylist-users] Technical paper from HP mentions Greylisting
michalk at awpi.com
Wed Jul 14 16:13:47 PDT 2004
After reading the paper, I feel that they borrowed heavily from your idea
and implemented a psuedo RBL.
I also feel that you should have been more prominently mentioned.
Brian Michalk <http://www.michalk.com>
Life is what you make of it ... never wish you had done something.
Aviator, experimental aircraft builder, motorcyclist, SCUBA diver
musician, home-brewer, entrepreneur and barely single
> -----Original Message-----
> From: greylist-users-bounces at lists.puremagic.com
> [mailto:greylist-users-bounces at lists.puremagic.com]On Behalf Of Evan
> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 3:29 PM
> To: Greylisting Users and Developers Discussion
> Subject: [Greylist-users] Technical paper from HP mentions Greylisting
> For those of you who are into anti-spam research, I was just notified of a
> paper coming from HP Labs that mentions Greylisting in a semi-favorable
> However, the paper seems to also focus a decent amount of attention on the
> perception that greylisting causes fairly high delay rate for
> non-spam. But
> the researchers came to that conclusion by including the delays from the
> inital training period in their 69 day data set.
> I've since pointed out to them that the actual good-mail-delayed rates is
> probably significantly lower if they exclude the training period, and also
> if there is a little judicious use of administrator whitelisting of known
> good servers.
> But the paper is still pretty interesting. Here's the link:
More information about the Greylist-users