Discuss October 2004

discuss@lists.surbl.org

44 participants
134 discussions

Help - Domain Age
by David Hooton 01 Oct '04

01 Oct '04

Hi All, I am trying to determine the age of goracer.de can anyone help, standard whois shown nothing of use. -- Regards, David Hooton

4 4

stopping ds.surbl.org service
by Jeff Chan 01 Oct '04

01 Oct '04

ds.surbl.org was an experimental list which is no longer getting any hits. We were serving it on a few name servers as a separate test list. I'd like to shut it down. Does anyone have any comments about doing that? If in future the folks behind the data are able to make a slice of it that only has pure spammers, then perhaps we may use it, but they don't appear to be moving in that direction currently. Jeff C. -- "If it appears in hams, then don't list it."

3 5

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Help classify quickinspirations.com
by Chris Santerre 01 Oct '04

01 Oct '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 12:54 AM >To: 'SURBL Discussion list' >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Help classify quickinspirations.com > > >On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 7:34:53 PM, Jeff Chan wrote: >> Most of these sites have open subscription forms, which invites >> abuse. If they have any kind of incentive programs for >> "affiliates" or anything like that, then that plus open >> subscriptions would *beg* for abuse. > >> That said, SBL does not list quickinspirations.com name servers >> or web site, etc. But NJABL does, and so do some others. > >OK I took a look at the NANAS hits, and all quickinspirations >mail seems to be sent from the same /27: > >64.37.73.212 64.37.73.221 64.37.73.218 64.37.73.214 >64.37.73.211 64.37.73.217 ... > >So if you block 64.37.73.192/27 or RBL it, ***you'll probably >never see any mail from quickinspirations ever again***. And anyone else who might be hosted on thos servers. :) > >Since these can be trivially blocked using regular RBLs or access >lists these probably aren't great SURBL candidates to begin with. > Trivial yes, but some people may prefer to use SURBL for this as it is 'safer' because it only blocks based on the domain. You yourself have said this about IPs. >The same cannot be said of spammers using zombies. Yes, but we are targeting spammers, not just spammers using zombies :) I'm wondering if we relist it, how long it would be until we heard someone complain. I'm only making this kind of a big deal because I think we will see this method grow. Hell what is to stop the spammer from getting his sister to complain to us that she signed up for this newsletter and it needs to be whitelisted? Something to consider is weighting the whitelist requests for domains that don't feel right like this one. One request for a domain like this may not cut the mustard. 3...OK. --Chris

3 3

RE: [SPAM-TAG] [SURBL-Discuss] Spammer threatening to suesingle4y ou.net
by Chris Santerre 01 Oct '04

01 Oct '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 11:50 PM >To: SURBL Discuss >Subject: Re: [SPAM-TAG] [SURBL-Discuss] Spammer threatening to >suesingle4you.net > > >On Sunday, September 26, 2004, 8:35:40 PM, Joe Wein wrote: >> "Jeff Chan" <jeffc(a)surbl.org> >>> But that's not the question. The question is: does the domain >>> have legitimate uses. If so we shouldn't list it. We should not >>> list domains that have legitimate uses, even if they do send >>> in some spam. > >> Hi Jeff, > >> the latest emails from Mr. Schiffer were much more friendly >in tone. He also >> admitted that he was only bluffing when he talked about >legal action, as he >> really does not have any money for that. > >> I have removed his listing and let him know about that. I >hope he learnt >> something from it. > >> I probably wouldn't have removed the domain without your >reminder. Looking >> at this case I realise how difficult it really is for >submitters *not* to >> list spammers who may have some legitimate uses. > >> Joe > >Thanks Joe. Hopefully he's learned his lesson. > What the hell?? I just read this whole thread! I would not have taken this guy off! No way in hell!!!!! Ray, add this yahoo to UC please! The domain is brand new, sends spam, and screams about getting listed! How the hell can he be legit! Did you guys read the NANAS listings that showed his wonderful emails? These are just the ones reported. He 'purchased' a list. So none of these were opt in. This is not the last we will hear of this guy. I think taking him off is a mistake. And IF he does it again, I'll report his a$$ to every RBL I can find, simply because you guys removed this idiot. --Chris (Jaded, fed up, and tired of the BS.)

7 13

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss October 2004