From jeffc@surbl.org Fri May 7 23:46:41 2004 From: Jeff Chan To: discuss@lists.surbl.org Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Should bravemouser.com be blacklisted? Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 14:45:22 -0700 Message-ID: <439683855.20040507144522@supranet.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2086071280031674032==" --===============2086071280031674032== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Friday, May 7, 2004, 7:36:18 AM, ITReading ITReading wrote: > Hello all, > I continue to receive messages with URIs to "bravemouser.com" > in the past few weeks. Should this domain be added to one of > the surbl lists? Most of the messages are TV Pay Per View spam.=20 > An example of one of the messages can be found here: > http://www.aldridge-borden.com/bravemouser.txt=20 I don't see any reports about it to SpamCop. You may want to do that. Definitely looks like spam to me. Interesting thing is that it uses a "base href" syntax with a later relative anchor "

You are receiving this = newsletter from the Acquired mailing list as a result of a recent transaction= on our network. To stop further messages from this mailing list follow the l= ink here.

Acquired Mailing List
849 Almar = Ave. STE., PMB 317
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
USA Does anyone know if the current message parsing code in SA 2.63 PerMsgStatus.pm or whatever correctly parses a base href + relative reference? IIRC from Buzgzilla, SA 3.0 will now resolve relative references such as these into absolute URIs so I think it's handled correctly there.=20 Jeff C. --===============2086071280031674032==--