Discuss November 2008

discuss@lists.surbl.org

13 participants
6 discussions

Recourse for legitimate users
by Lena＠lena.kiev.ua 25 Nov '08

25 Nov '08

http://www.surbl.org/faq.html : > To request removal from a SURBL list, please start with the the SURBL > Lookup page and follow the instructions on the removal form. The removal form in case of the "jino-net-MUNGED.ru" domain (listed in PH and SC) asks for "Sending IP addresses", "Typical message advertising the web site". Sending, advertising what? I run a discussion mailing list like this one. A list member posted an on-topic message to the list mentioning the member's website http://swallow.jino-net-MUNGED.ru - on-topic for the list, not phishing/spam/malware/etc. jino-net-MUNGED.ru is a free web-hosting like geocities.com. What recourse honest, legitimate users of that webhosting have? Now the message with blacklisted URL is in the list's archive, new members request a part of archive (few hundred messages in the body of a letter from an autoresponder), a free mail service (ngs.ru) the list member uses rejects the letter, I (who run the autoresponder) get the bounce. What recourse I, the member and the subdomain's honest owner have? I don't understand what to fill in the IP, header and body fields of the form. I tried to send the form not filling some fields and got an error message with "Please contact us by email at whitelist at our domain if you have any questions". I wrote to that email address with details and got: > <Chris_Barton()mcafee.com> (expanded from <whitelist()surbl.org>): host > sncwsrelay1.nai.com[67.97.80.204] said: 550 Denied - Spam Detection (in > reply to end of DATA command) So, Chris is protected from complaints of false positives. http://www.surbl.org/faq.html : > It's a good practice to use little or no filtering on your security > mailing list messages and abuse contact addresses, or to bypss them > around filtering. Yeah. At the same time the list member requested other parts of the list archive, and I got other bounces: > SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data: > host imx5.ngs.ru [195.93.186.194]: 550 5.7.1 URL http://sexmagnet-MUNGED.com > in your message is blacklisted, see http://www.surbl.org/lists.html The letters don't contain that URL, I checked. They contain (in the body) email address of another member @sexmagnet-MUNGED.com You can check the website: it's one of seven domains of a free mail service hotpop.com (like hotmail.com or gmail.com). Listed in PH. Huh? Using that logic, lets block the gmail.com domain: I don't know about hotpop, but I have evidence that gmail accepts (with an autoreply), but then completely ignores spam complaints. Does SURBL care of false positives at all? I run a MTA too, I for sure shall never use SURBL because I do care of false positives. But plenty mailadmins who use SpamAssassin and directly SURBL never suspect what disservce they make for their users. http://www.surbl.org/faq.html : > most SC users probably make an effort to uncheck > legitimate domains to prevent false reporting. Are you serious? Elena Shevchenko

1 0

regarding SURBL Blacklist Removal Request
by sheirling 20 Nov '08

20 Nov '08

Hi, We've submitted a removal request for our domain skyquestcom.com using LOOKUP page in surbl.com (filled in the complete form and the response page show "your request has been received") Yet our domain is still in the blacklist. May I know usually how long will it take for our domain to be removed from the list? Will there be any email notification? Thank you for your help. Regards, sheirling. "Program for Success" ---------------------------------- Tel : +603-89961719 Fax: +603-89961720 <http://www.inspirationjuntion.com/> www.InspirationJuntion.com Be inspired Everyday SkyQuestCom ranked 7th in Deloitte Technology Fast 500 Asia Pacific 2005. The first Singapore company ever came in Top 10 fastest growing technology company in Asia Pacific.

3 2

Re: [SURBL-Discuss] [SURBL-Announce] SURBL Usage Policy change
by Chris Santerre 07 Nov '08

07 Nov '08

> -----Original Message----- > From: Joseph Brennan [mailto:brennan@columbia.edu] > Sent: 2008-11-06 16:21 > To: discuss(a)lists.surbl.org; SURBL Zones > Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] [SURBL-Announce] SURBL Usage > Policy change > > > > At-- SURBL usage policy: http://www.surbl.org/usage-policy.html > > I get very different pricing depending whether I input 80,000 users > or 80000 users (same number, no comma). > > Number of messages does not affect it. > > At the price for 80,000 (sic) I have no objection at all. At the > other price I'll really have to analyze how much we block with it. > I'm not sure what conclusion I will reach. I do not speak for SURBL in any way. I would say anyone who is thinking of not using it due to policy changes should discuss this with them OFFLIST. I believe this is not ment to hinder people using it, or even become filthy rich. Just to keep the darn thing running :) But thats just my opinion. Jeff is good people ;) --Chris

4 3

Re: [SURBL-Discuss] [SURBL-Announce] SURBL Usage Policy change
by Jeff Chan 07 Nov '08

07 Nov '08

On Thursday, November 6, 2008, 9:55:40 AM, Alex Marinkovic wrote: > How does this effect current rsync subscribers? How long will current > rsync access remain available? > Thanks, > Alex Hi Alex, Thanks for bringing up another point I didn't address in the announcement but probably should have. All large rsync users would be asked to pay, but there would be a 90 day grace period. Arnie can probably provide more details: Arnie Bjorklund MXTools http://www.mxtools.com/ 1-866-931-9228 His email address is arnieb at his domain above, and he's also seeing this since he's on the list. Jeff C.

2 2

Re: [SURBL-Discuss] [SURBL-Announce] SURBL Usage Policy change
by Joseph Brennan 07 Nov '08

07 Nov '08

At-- SURBL usage policy: http://www.surbl.org/usage-policy.html I get very different pricing depending whether I input 80,000 users or 80000 users (same number, no comma). Number of messages does not affect it. At the price for 80,000 (sic) I have no objection at all. At the other price I'll really have to analyze how much we block with it. I'm not sure what conclusion I will reach. Joseph Brennan Lead Email Systems Engineer Columbia University Information Technology

2 1

Removal Request: leavewhitefolksalone.com
by WRICHARDSON 01 Nov '08

01 Nov '08

Second request -----Original Message----- From: WRICHARDSON [mailto:wrichardson@cushcity.com] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 12:31 PM To: 'mailman(a)lists.surbl.org' Subject: Removal Request: leavewhitefolksalone.com Removal Request: leavewhitefolksalone.com Why is the response so slow? The form is long and difficult to fill out. We do not know where we are in the process. Your contact information is from different groups. We have removed your client from our database and you still have us in your database. Could you please remove us from your blacklist? Thanks Willie Willie A. Richardson wrichardson(a)cushcity.com 1-800-340-5454 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.3/1748 - Release Date: 10/31/2008 4:10 PM

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss November 2008