> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raymond Dijkxhoorn [mailto:raymond@surbl.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 2:48 AM
> To: SURBL Discussion list
> Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] browser plugin?
>
>
> Hi!
>
> >>> How does anyone else feel, particularly operators of our public
> >>> nameservers?
>
> >> What would be the goal of a browser plugin?
>
> > To warn the browser's user (me, ATM) that the site they are
> visiting is
> > spamvertised and/or a reported phishing site. Useful for
> those who do
> > not have control over their mail server, especially if
> they're using
> > webmail.
>
> Any idea waht this would do to the nameservers we are
> running, checking
> each and every URI a user visits? Rather usefull but also
> rather silly.
> There are vendors allready doing this, they are free to use
> the plugin,
> but please dont use the public infrastructure for this goal.
> Or are you
> somehow distributing the data together with the plugin, dont think so?
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond.
I agree with Raymond. It makes sense to use it in a company that mirrors the
SURBL/URIBL data internaly. Then the proxy could cut down on lookups.
I've have actually posted the request to the Firefox people for a plugin, a
long time ago. Back when I was with SURBL. They were very interested, but I
honestly haven't looked back into it since going to URIBL.
But using the public resources would put a strain on the mirrors. (and most
likely get the abusive IPs rejected from connecting any further.)
The idea has merit, but the implimintation is tricky.
--Chris