Discuss January 2005

discuss@lists.surbl.org

38 participants
50 discussions

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Submission
by Chris Santerre 25 Jan '05

25 Jan '05

>-----Original Message----- >From: Frank Ellermann [mailto:nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de] >Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2005 7:47 AM >To: discuss(a)lists.surbl.org >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Submission > > >Jeff Chan wrote: > >> SC and AB use SpamCop reports as input. > >Okay, nothing to do here for SC users, normal spam >reports with SpamCop are good enough. > >> JP and OB use private traps as input. > >Also clear, stuff found by Joe etc. or by outblaze. > >> WS is a manual list. > >That's what I tested (resulting in a 403 + 404 ;-) > >> That said, I've updated the Lists document slightly >> to reflect this and added a FAQ entry also. >> http://www.surbl.org/faq.html#reporting > >Thanks. I've posted a pointer to this thread in the >SpamCop newsgroup. The most interesting SURBL for SC >reporters is probably PH, if they send their reports >to one of the PH addresses mentioned in your article > ><http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.rbl.surbl/3754> Thanks for the headsup. It *appears* to be working, but I have special permissions. Can you double check for me. --Chris

3 2

Submission
by Frank Ellermann 23 Jan '05

23 Jan '05

Hi, something I saw in a SpamCop discussion: <news://news.spamcop.net/csv88p$met$1@news.spamcop.net> <http://news.spamcop.net/pipermail/spamcop-list/2005-January/096914.html> | I don't know of any other method of feeding spamvertised urls to any of | the subsections of surbl described here http://www.surbl.org/lists.html Apparently that FAQ isn't answered in the FAQ (?). Therefore I tried to find an answer, but that ended with a "403 forbidden" causing a "404 not found" for the URL <http://www.rulesemporium.com/cgi-bin/?report=1> So what is the answer for this FAQ ? Bye, Frank

2 2

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Fraudwatch.com
by benjamin＠divingislife.net 20 Jan '05

20 Jan '05

sorry for the mistake it's : http://www.fraudwatchinternational.com Original message sent on the Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:36:09 -0500 by csanterre(a)MerchantsOverseas.com > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: benjamin(a)divingislife.net > [mailto:benjamin@divingislife.net] > >Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 10:55 AM > >To: discuss(a)lists.surbl.org > >Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] Fraudwatch.com > > > > > > > >Fraudwatch.com seem to do a great job against phishing > monitoring, > >do you think that it could be possible to work with them > for > >the phising > >list ? > > How the heck do you even get into the site? I don't see a > way to sign up? > > --Chris > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org > http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >

2 1

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Fraudwatch.com
by Chris Santerre 19 Jan '05

19 Jan '05

>-----Original Message----- >From: benjamin(a)divingislife.net [mailto:benjamin@divingislife.net] >Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 10:55 AM >To: discuss(a)lists.surbl.org >Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] Fraudwatch.com > > > >Fraudwatch.com seem to do a great job against phishing monitoring, >do you think that it could be possible to work with them for >the phising >list ? How the heck do you even get into the site? I don't see a way to sign up? --Chris

1 0

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] RFC: remove zone files from SURBL web site
by Chris Santerre 19 Jan '05

19 Jan '05

>Chris, a year is really nothing. Google and all these way >back archives >make things pretty long-lasting. If it's causing a problem with your >server, put a text file that says the new location in it instead of the >actual rules. Yup, I've done that since we moved to the new SARE site. All the rule files are empty! Just a note that tells them where the new ones are. So I guess no one is reading them. They are clearly RDJ scripts that no one has changed. I'm tempted to put an evil regex in there to get their attention, but that is a little too evil :) --Chris

3 2

Fraudwatch.com
by benjamin＠divingislife.net 19 Jan '05

19 Jan '05

Fraudwatch.com seem to do a great job against phishing monitoring, do you think that it could be possible to work with them for the phising list ?

1 0

Anyone from SPEWS around?
by Raymond Dijkxhoorn 19 Jan '05

19 Jan '05

Hi! Sorry to bother all of you with this, but it might help solving a issue we seem to have with a old SPEWS listing: Could anyone involved with SPEWS or with contacts there ask them to remove a block they set in 2002/2003 ? http://www.spews.org/html/S1441.html The seem to have blocked a pretty large range, and that range is also including the SURBL mailinglist server. Obviously some people are missing posts when filtering with SPEWS. We have tried to contact SPEWS but they are not very responsive. We would be rather thankfull if they could exclude 81.23.230.0/24 from their listing, and even better remove the complete block they set. Thanks for your time. Bye, Raymond Dijkxhoorn - SURBL.

7 12

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] RFC: remove zone files from SURBL web site
by Chris Santerre 19 Jan '05

19 Jan '05

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 6:06 AM >To: SURBL Discuss >Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] RFC: remove zone files from SURBL web site > > >I'd like to get rid of the sc and ws bind and rbldnsd zone files >from the SURBL web site and replace them with a note asking >people to use rsync instead. Does anyone have any comments on >this? We don't want people grabbing the zone files from the web >site since rsync is so much more efficient. > >Probably I would check the web logs and try to contact some of >the folks trying this also. > Makes sense to me. And if they don't stop, then deny their IP. Which is what I'm about to do to all those people still trying to download rules that haven't been on my server in almost a year! --Chris

2 1

New surbl client: Yasu
by benjamin＠divingislife.net 19 Jan '05

19 Jan '05

Hi all, I'm glad to announce another client for surbl: Yasu It work on WIN32/W2K and intend primarly to work with clearswift Mailsweeper, but should work with any other mail system that can run external script and interpret return codes. It is Release under the GNU GPL licence. You can download it at: www.divingislife.net/yasu Enjoy and send me comment.

2 1

FW: Semi-OT: Spammer sues spam-report
by Chris Santerre 18 Jan '05

18 Jan '05

I thought this was worth forwarding, as you never know when one of our projects may fall under this kind of silly thing. Also want to keep a good eye out on the Discovery aspect of it all. What spammers don't realize is that with this suit, we can now find out more about them. --Chris >-----Original Message----- >From: Matthew Cline [mailto:matt@nightrealms.com] >Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 2:01 PM >To: ML-spamassassin-talk >Subject: Semi-OT: Spammer sues spam-report > > >A spammer is suing someone who reported their spam for >"Tortuous Interference >with Contract" and "Defamation": > >> The defendant knew intentionally and improperly interfered with the >> performance of the said contract by inducing Lightship Telecom and >> Spectra Access, Inc., to terminate the contracts. > >... > >> The defenandt induced the termination by intentionally making >> misrepresentation about ATRIKS and Brian Haberstroh to the said >> third parties. > >It would be funny if it weren't for Jay Stuler having to pay >legal fees for >all this; Jay can seriously use donations to help fight this. >I find it >interesting that they aren't suing Spamhaus.org or Spews.org, >which also have >"misrepresentations" about the spammers; looks rather like a >SLAPP lawsuit to >me. > >Jay posted the following to USENET: > >From: Jay Stuler <usenetjunk2004(a)yahoo.com> >Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email >Subject: Atriks lawsuit update >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 22:22:03 -0500 > >> Hello gentle NANAE readers... > >> I found out this week that they declined my motion to dismiss. Yes >> - even though I am not a citizen of New Hampshire, and I have never >> been there, or done business there, they still decided I can be sued >> there. So the next stage of the suit begins - discovery. Some >> interesting things should come of this stage... > >> Unfortunately, this will cost quite a bit of money - which I still >> don't have. I need more donations to go further. But if I am >> financially able to go further, I am sure that many interesting >> things about Haberstroh's operation will be unearthed, if you know >> what I mean. > >> My lawyer made it quite clear to Haberstroh's lawyer that he will >> never receive any money, even with a judgement. Nevertheless, >> Haberstroh wishes to continue with the suit, to make spammers seem >> like the good guys. > >> I am still taking donations through PayPal. Every little bit helps. >> If there is any extra left over at the end of this (for some reason) >> it will be proportionately returned to the donors. The site with >> information on the suit is still at: >> http://spamlawsuit.spamshield.org I will update the site with more >> information as it comes to me. > >> Also please pass this on to anyone who you may think be >> interested... > >> Thanks > >-- >Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on >fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. > >Advanced SPAM filtering software: http://spamassassin.org >

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss January 2005