>...
>
>adprofile.net reportedly appeared in a flowers.com ham as:
>
><td align="middle"><a href="http://tx.adprofile.net/tx/r?CID=12&M=3&sid=800ABC123"><IMG height=90
>src="http://a1234.g.akamai.net/f/1233/1234/1a/www.1800flowers.com/800f_assets/im… me
>too120X90.gif" width="120" NOSEND="1" border="0"></a></td>
>
>Yet it's listed on WS by Bill Stearns. This may be a false
>positive. Does anyone have any more information …
[View More]about it?
>
>Catherine Hampton says it's not on her spam radar and others
>have said that they may be web spammers on guestbooks, wikis,
>etc. but not email spammers. They seem to have some minor
>NANAS.
>
>Feedback wanted. :-)
>
>Jeff C.
>--
>Don't harm innocent bystanders.
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
>http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
Slime, but not an email spammer to my knowledge - They do redirect
you (always) through portland.co. uk, who is slime also (and worse, but
still not an email spammer as far as I know). BTW, they both will gladly
sell your name, email address and IP (and probably whatever else they can
collect).
Chris, if your reading this, you should now have two more "grey"
entries for URIBL; But these both seem like FPs for SURBL.
Paul Shupak
track(a)plectere.com
P.S. This is probaly the wrond list, but for those using URIBL, what scores
are you using (mine are pretty low)? Reply on the URIBL list if it seems
more appropriate (likely it is).
[View Less]
Has anyone seen any spams that use two (or more) messages to catch the
recipient's eye?
E.g.: The first message has cutesy CSS-obfuscated text and maybe a
graphic or two, and informs/commands the user to watch for the follow-up
email from the same person and with a certain given catchphrase in the
subject line
The second followup message that arrives a minute or two later is
perhaps marked with an identical From: name (but not an identical from
address), and perhaps the prophesied …
[View More]catchphrase in the subject line.
The payload (a URL or phone number or whatever), would be in the body or
even subject line of the email message.
Comments?
[View Less]
[off list reply published with Eric's permission]
On Monday, May 9, 2005, 9:33:12 AM, Eric Smith wrote:
> Found out this morning it was an error in the way we were reporting file
> times. Everything is good now. We were piping modified times out to an
> HTML page every hour then we check if the page had changed at all in the
> last 12 hours.
> /E.
Cool. BTW if you want to know the actual timestamp of the data,
the best way is to look at the zone file serial number. Those
…
[View More]are generated from the number of epoch seconds at UTC when the
file is created. For example:
% dig multi.surbl.org soa
[...]
multi.surbl.org. 15M IN SOA a.surbl.org. zone.surbl.org. (
1115680902 ; serial
10M ; refresh
5M ; retry
1W ; expiry
15M ) ; minimum
% % date -u -r 1115680902
Mon May 9 23:21:42 UTC 2005
Jeff C.
--
Don't harm innocent bystanders.
[View Less]
Because they don't take to kindly to anyone doing tons of whois looksups an
hour. Trust me ;)
--Chris
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Matthew Wilson [mailto:matthew@boomer.com]
>Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 9:44 AM
>To: SURBL Discussion list
>Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] newly registered domains
>
>
>Why not integrate a whois date lookup directly into SURBL or URIBL?
>Design an encoding system whereby
>suspectedspammydomain.spammertld.dr.surbl.org (or uribl.com)…
[View More] would
>return the date somehow regex encoded in the IP address. Then write a
>nice SA rule that decodes it, also using regex. Are there any regex
>geniuses out there that could encode a date in an IP address?
>
>-Matthew
>
>
>> Well this has been brought up before. It is a very good idea,
>> however difficult to implement. Unfortunetly the date
>> returned by a whois querey comes in a wide variety of
>> flavors. We (SARE) thought we had all of the returned date
>> codes figured out. Nope. New ones still keep coming.
>>
>> uribl.com has some ideas on how to attack this very issue,
>> but not sure it is worth it yet.
>>
>> In short, it would be wonderful to start doing whois lookups
>> for every domain in an email. Lots of things could be flagged
>> off of it. Think of a sort of baysien whois DB. But the
>> traffic would be pretty dam big.
>>
>> --Chris
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
>> http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
>http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
[View Less]
Exactly, and do you have any idea how many of the lookups would be needed
per day? I do! Enough to get the uribl dns ip doing the lookups, blocked
from the whois servers.
People running the whois servers don't really play nice with others. You
need to approach them very carefully. APNIC is not going to be to helpful ;)
--Chris
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Matthew Wilson [mailto:matthew@boomer.com]
>Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 1:29 PM
>To: SURBL Discussion list
>…
[View More]Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] newly registered domains
>
>
>I wasn't talking about doing huge numbers of whois lookups; I
>was saying
>cache the whois lookups in the a uribl dns zone, encoded using regex.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: discuss-bounces(a)lists.surbl.org
>> [mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org] On Behalf Of Chris Santerre
>> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 9:20 AM
>> To: 'SURBL Discussion list'
>> Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] newly registered domains
>>
>> Because they don't take to kindly to anyone doing tons of
>> whois looksups an hour. Trust me ;)
>>
>> --Chris
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Matthew Wilson [mailto:matthew@boomer.com]
>> >Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 9:44 AM
>> >To: SURBL Discussion list
>> >Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] newly registered domains
>> >
>> >
>> >Why not integrate a whois date lookup directly into SURBL or URIBL?
>> >Design an encoding system whereby
>> >suspectedspammydomain.spammertld.dr.surbl.org (or uribl.com) would
>> >return the date somehow regex encoded in the IP address.
>> Then write a
>> >nice SA rule that decodes it, also using regex. Are there
>any regex
>> >geniuses out there that could encode a date in an IP address?
>> >
>> >-Matthew
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
>http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
[View Less]
I wasn't talking about doing huge numbers of whois lookups; I was saying
cache the whois lookups in the a uribl dns zone, encoded using regex.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces(a)lists.surbl.org
> [mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org] On Behalf Of Chris Santerre
> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 9:20 AM
> To: 'SURBL Discussion list'
> Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] newly registered domains
>
> Because they don't take to kindly to anyone doing tons of
&…
[View More]gt; whois looksups an hour. Trust me ;)
>
> --Chris
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Matthew Wilson [mailto:matthew@boomer.com]
> >Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 9:44 AM
> >To: SURBL Discussion list
> >Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] newly registered domains
> >
> >
> >Why not integrate a whois date lookup directly into SURBL or URIBL?
> >Design an encoding system whereby
> >suspectedspammydomain.spammertld.dr.surbl.org (or uribl.com) would
> >return the date somehow regex encoded in the IP address.
> Then write a
> >nice SA rule that decodes it, also using regex. Are there any regex
> >geniuses out there that could encode a date in an IP address?
> >
> >-Matthew
[View Less]
Why not integrate a whois date lookup directly into SURBL or URIBL?
Design an encoding system whereby
suspectedspammydomain.spammertld.dr.surbl.org (or uribl.com) would
return the date somehow regex encoded in the IP address. Then write a
nice SA rule that decodes it, also using regex. Are there any regex
geniuses out there that could encode a date in an IP address?
-Matthew
> Well this has been brought up before. It is a very good idea,
> however difficult to implement. …
[View More]Unfortunetly the date
> returned by a whois querey comes in a wide variety of
> flavors. We (SARE) thought we had all of the returned date
> codes figured out. Nope. New ones still keep coming.
>
> uribl.com has some ideas on how to attack this very issue,
> but not sure it is worth it yet.
>
> In short, it would be wonderful to start doing whois lookups
> for every domain in an email. Lots of things could be flagged
> off of it. Think of a sort of baysien whois DB. But the
> traffic would be pretty dam big.
>
> --Chris
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
> http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
[View Less]
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Matthew Wilson [mailto:matthew@boomer.com]
>Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 9:29 PM
>To: Jeff Chan; SURBL Discussion list
>Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] newly registered domains
>
>
>Does anyone know of a SA rule to check how recently a domain name has
>been registered?
>
>The various uri lookups catch the vast majority of spammy urls during
>the day, but from 2-5 a.m. CST, my servers get hit with tons of spam
>with urls that …
[View More]aren't in SURBL yet. All of the domains are newly
>registered domains (registered in the past week or so).
>
>I know that the SARE ninjas have some private tools to do this kind of
>lookup for their feeds and manual lookups, but I'm wondering if this
>kind of thing could be worked directly into a SA rule.
Well this has been brought up before. It is a very good idea, however
difficult to implement. Unfortunetly the date returned by a whois querey
comes in a wide variety of flavors. We (SARE) thought we had all of the
returned date codes figured out. Nope. New ones still keep coming.
uribl.com has some ideas on how to attack this very issue, but not sure it
is worth it yet.
In short, it would be wonderful to start doing whois lookups for every
domain in an email. Lots of things could be flagged off of it. Think of a
sort of baysien whois DB. But the traffic would be pretty dam big.
--Chris
[View Less]
When you say several times an hour, does that mean weekends and holidays
also?
/E.
-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces(a)lists.surbl.org
[mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Chan
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 11:01 AM
To: SURBL Discussion list
Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] multi.surbl.org.rbldnsd Update Times
On Sunday, May 8, 2005, 7:09:11 AM, Eric Smith wrote:
> I'm sure this is dependent on the mirror we are pulling the zone from, but
> how often is …
[View More]the source zone updated, and should we expect that mirrors
> update on a regular schedule around the clock? What I'm getting at is we
> are monitoring file changes to the zone file to ensure it's updating
often,
> but as of Friday we have received no updates (I'm guessing because it
> doesn't get updated on the weekends). Is my assumption correct? Does the
> schedule vary by mirror? If so is there a mirror that anyone knows the
> replication interval for? If not Jeff do you know the schedule
requirements
> for a site to become a mirror so we can base monitoring off this schedule?
If you're asking about spamhaus lists, I have no idea. SURBL
lists are updated several times an hour usually.
Jeff C.
--
Don't harm innocent bystanders.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[View Less]
Does anyone know of a SA rule to check how recently a domain name has
been registered?
The various uri lookups catch the vast majority of spammy urls during
the day, but from 2-5 a.m. CST, my servers get hit with tons of spam
with urls that aren't in SURBL yet. All of the domains are newly
registered domains (registered in the past week or so).
I know that the SARE ninjas have some private tools to do this kind of
lookup for their feeds and manual lookups, but I'm wondering if this
kind …
[View More]of thing could be worked directly into a SA rule.
Thanks,
Matthew
[View Less]