>> FWIW Joe's getting jobbed:
>
>Hi Jeff,
>
>I had three joe jobs against me between December 2003 and February 2004.
>Since then it had been quiet, but I must say I wasn't entirely surprized
>that it continued, especially after a PayPal joe job less than two months
>ago.
>
>> Return-Path: <bouteille(a)kinki-kids.com>
>> Received: from dbzmail.com ([61.85.57.209])
>> by smtp1.supranet.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id
>j6P3ZTlx009677
>> for <x>; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:35:30 -0500 (CDT)
>> Received: from kinki-kids.com (kinki-kids-com-bk.mr.outblaze.com
>[64.62.181.92])
>> by dbzmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5A841602F
>> for <x>; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 00:39:14 -0500
>> From: "Ambulance U. Descant" <bouteille(a)kinki-kids.com>
>
>This seems to be a bulkmailer that inserts fake Outblaze references into the
>headers to obscure the broadband hosts that are the real sources (or
>proxies). I've seen other examples with other bogus Outblaze maildomains for
>the fake sender. According to one admin who monitored the Joe job sources
>from their site the hosts are running something called "DMS Revolution proxy
>spam engine".
>
>Joe
>
>>...
DMS is Alexey Panov's bulk mailer product. That and porn sites
are his main stock in trade see the Spamhaus listings (currently #6, down
for #5 since Kuvayev made #3). More info on Panov available is you ask.
So now we know who you pissed off - and why it "looks" like a
porn site.
Paul Shupak
track(a)plectere.com
FWIW Joe's getting jobbed:
__
Return-Path: <bouteille(a)kinki-kids.com>
Received: from dbzmail.com ([61.85.57.209])
by smtp1.supranet.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id j6P3ZTlx009677
for <x>; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:35:30 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from kinki-kids.com (kinki-kids-com-bk.mr.outblaze.com [64.62.181.92])
by dbzmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5A841602F
for <x>; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 00:39:14 -0500
From: "Ambulance U. Descant" <bouteille(a)kinki-kids.com>
To: Info <x>
Subject: Hi dear
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 00:39:14 -0500
Message-ID: <100101c59012$879febec$06412c2e(a)kinki-kids.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2605
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123
X-GMX-Antivirus: 0 (no virus found)
X-UIDL: K,H!!c%?"!Fde!!XT9"!
Hi
Try jwSpamSpy, our spam filter for POP3 mailboxes.
We use it to track spammers and scammers.
Free full featured 30 day evaluation version available!
http://www.joewein.de/
--
Don't harm innocent bystanders.
>...
>
>FWIW Joe's getting jobbed:
>__
>
>Return-Path: <bouteille(a)kinki-kids.com>
>Received: from dbzmail.com ([61.85.57.209])
> by smtp1.supranet.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id j6P3ZTlx009677
> for <x>; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:35:30 -0500 (CDT)
>Received: from kinki-kids.com (kinki-kids-com-bk.mr.outblaze.com [64.62.181.92])
> by dbzmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5A841602F
> for <x>; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 00:39:14 -0500
>From: "Ambulance U. Descant" <bouteille(a)kinki-kids.com>
>To: Info <x>
>Subject: Hi dear
>Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 00:39:14 -0500
>Message-ID: <100101c59012$879febec$06412c2e(a)kinki-kids.com>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2605
>Importance: Normal
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123
>X-GMX-Antivirus: 0 (no virus found)
>X-UIDL: K,H!!c%?"!Fde!!XT9"!
>
>Hi
>Try jwSpamSpy, our spam filter for POP3 mailboxes.
>We use it to track spammers and scammers.
>Free full featured 30 day evaluation version available!
>
>http://www.joewein.de/
>
>...
kinki-kids.com is actually a quite legitimate Outblaze customer.
Every forgery or it I have seen is for CP or at least "std." pornography.
So maybe Joe can guess at who he pissed off. The sender's IP 61.85.57.209
seems to be a comprimised Windows box on DSL at Kornet - Dynamic address
too. The IP is only listed at five-ten, SORBS, NOMOREFUNN, and NJABL;
In other words, not really listed or listable (except as dynamic or for
full Korean blockage). If it is still the same machine connected at that
IP, the entrance was probably the wide open UPnP port or the IIS running.
Backdoor installed on port 123 (ntp) UDP - machine is "0wn3d". Also, the
routing takes an "interesting" side trip by way fo Kornet -> TONEK (China)
the back -> Kornet. Maybe a very good hack at the router level (AS4766 to
AS17431 back to AS4766) - Not many people capable of that.
I doubt many people running any BLs would list Joe.
Paul Shupak
track(a)plectere.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
not sure how useful this may be, but fyi...
- --j.
- ------- Forwarded Message
> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 22:11:13 -0600
> From: Marcia Blake
>
> This comes to us fresh from the July GoDaddy.com newsletter (naturally,
> in a bit trying to sell longer domain registration terms on
> GuessWhere):
>
> Google recently filed United States Patent Application 20050071741. As
> part of that application, Google made apparent its efforts to wipe out
> search engine spam, stating:
>
> "Valuable (legitimate) domains are often paid for several years in
> advance, while doorway (illegitimate) domains rarely are used for more
> than a year. Therefore, the date when a domain expires in the future
> can be used as a factor in predicting the legitimacy of a domain and,
> thus, the documents associated therewith."
>
> Domains registered for longer periods give the indication, true or
> not, that their owner is legitimate. Google uses a domain's length of
> registration when indexing and ranking a Web site for inclusion in
> their organic search results.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS
iD8DBQFC4pFrMJF5cimLx9ARAt0CAJ0Rjjd7Owx/ba4AhZzZc1NdmQI6xACeI0L9
FVY5zV+kY5cQuVH/VpEEYrQ=
=w9zn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Some of these were blacklisted recently, but perhaps shouldn't
be. Do you have any information about these domains?
tim.com.br
7 year old domain, but I can't read Portugese.
What do they do? Is it possibly legitimate?
callin.net
Korean tech site of some kind. 5.5 years old.
ivyro.net
Korean, 2.5 years old.
drugstorebestbuys.com
Sells prescription drugs. Obviously very high spam potential,
but has been around for about 4 years.
bgreetings.com
Greeting cards. Also potentially spammy, but more than 4 years old.
Jeff C.
--
Don't harm innocent bystanders.
Hi All:
Apologies in advance for off-topic post but it is for a good cause and if
anyone will know an answer, it's most likely to come from the Anti-SPAM
community.
My company is pro bono handling the website and donating all the time to
handle mailing list, web design, paypal coordination, and more for Susan
Torres, a pregnant woman who collapsed from an aneurysm and is brain dead
from a cancer. However, with her wishes and her families support they are
trying to save her unborn child. The site is
http://www.susantorresfund.org/ if you want to know more.
However, on the more technical side, we have thousands and thousands of
subscribers to the mailing list but AOL started rate limiting us on
Thursday. We are vigilant anti-spammers and run a tight ship so we are not
blacklisted or BUT we aren't whitelisted either. This is causing heavy
queuing and complaints from customers all around.
I have spoken at length to AOL's Postmaster Help Desk but they are telling
me 5 days to 3 weeks to process the whitelist request which we placed on
Friday. In the meantime, our customers are getting mad about their email,
our servers are filling up on deferred emails and there is also major news
expected on Monday the 18th which will make the issue much worse.
The AOL Postmaster Case # is 155527142. The Ticket is 995445. The IP that
needs whitelisting is 209.225.49.10. Anyone who has any contacts that can
help escalate and resolve this issue as soon as possible (and hopefully
before the 18th) would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Kevin A. McGrail aka KAM
Chairman
Peregrine Computer Consultants Corporation
3927 Old Lee Hwy, Suite 102-C
Fairfax City, VA 22030-2422
http://www.pccc.com/
800-823-8402 - 703-359-8451 Fax
kmcgrail(a)pccc.com
The new SURBL data engine is ready enough to start testing. The
external lists such as WS, JP, OB, AB, PH have essentially the
same content as before, but the SC and XS lists are significantly
updated.
The new XS list is twice as large at about 1000 records and the
inclusion is a lot more selective to get more spammers and far
fewer FPs.
The new SC list has about the same 500 or so records based on
report counts, but adds nearly 4000 domains based on their IP
resolutions into the most spammy networks. That's in addition to
my manual blacklist which is also several thousand records now,
but the manual blacklist applies to both old and new lists, so
it's the bad IP domains that are the main change. By design,
they're very spammy; they're pretty much the most spammy of those
reported to SpamCop.
I'd like us to start testing these now. We can simply change XS
over to the new data at some point, but for SC, we should set
up a temporary new domain like sc2.surbl.org so it can be tested
independently of sc. The new lists should be significant
improvements over the old lists, but naturally we should test
the new SC list before putting it into production since sc is
currently live. Would anyone with a public nameserver like to
carry sc2 for testing? It is a temporary zone and will go away
after testing. Please reply off list if you can serve it up.
Perhaps we'll cut over XS when we have SC2 set up so the changes
are more or less simultaneous. Might make testing/stats simpler
to keep track of that way.
Note: please don't start testing sc2 in a major way until we have
several name servers set up. Even then the name servers probably
won't handle large production loads, so it should be tested on
smaller mail servers, test corpora, etc. We'll mention here when
it's ok to start testing.
Comments?
Jeff C.
--
Don't harm innocent bystanders.
>On Friday, July 8, 2005, 4:55:18 PM, Jeff Chan wrote:
>
>
>>On Thursday, July 7, 2005, 5:23:53 PM, Jeff Chan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Thursday, July 7, 2005, 3:15:18 PM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Jeff Chan wrote in
>>>><http://mid.gmane.org/41160649.20050707074952@surbl.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>
>>>>>Does anyone know of a new application doing queries against
>>>>>multi.surbl.org by using dnsstuff's web site, as in:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>>FWIW Scott has traced the lookups to a very poorly implemented
>>web site checker (probably looking for phishing sites) for Firefox.
>>I'm asking him for more details.
>>
>>
>
>Here is the borkenware:
>
> https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firefox&id=9…
>
>Due to Scott's actions it is no longer functional as written.
>I am leaving a comment on the board there:
>
>
>
I saw that addon and came across this:
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=283545
I'm not sure how an auto-update feature would work, perhaps if the ISP
did it for their subscribers, but could this concept be a benifical
extension to mozilla?
Does anyone know of a new application doing queries against
multi.surbl.org by using dnsstuff's web site, as in:
http://www.DNSstuff.com/tools/lookup.ch?domain=example.com.multi.surbl.org
If so, would you please let them know this is not the right way
to query our SURBL lists.
It's possibly malware, but more likely some new misbehaving
application being run on end user client machines (dsl lines,
etc.).
Jeff C.
--
Don't harm innocent bystanders.