- Discuss - Mailman 3

Pleaae beta test ds.surbl.org - 6dos data
by Jeff Chan 29 Jun '04

29 Jun '04

Please beta test ds.surbl.org which is the 6dos data turned into a SURBL. In particular, please check the false positive rate and let us know what you find. Please do not use ds.surbl.org for production mail servers as it is hosted only on my name server. (Chris, the list has about 120,000 entries. Were there some .c files which we should exclude?) Please note that I have removed ob2.surbl.org as it was for testing only and the data source for it is now used as ob.surbl.org. Jeff C.

3 5

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] The beast has been fed. 6dos now in WS.surbl. org
by Chris Santerre 29 Jun '04

29 Jun '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 5:28 PM >To: SURBL Discussion list (E-mail) >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] The beast has been fed. 6dos now in >WS.surbl.org > > >On Monday, June 28, 2004, 12:31:24 PM, Chris Santerre wrote: >> The '6dos' project domains have now been fed into >ws.surbl.org. This is a >> huge collection of spam domains. The reason I did this now >is the format is >&… [View More]

2 1

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] The beast has been fed. 6dos now in WS.surbl. org
by Chris Santerre 29 Jun '04

29 Jun '04

Agreed. But I still think you should leave the updated version up ;) Here is what I added: http://www.merchantsoverseas.com/domains-1.tar.gz link good until 2 PM tomorrow. >-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 7:35 PM >To: SURBL Discussion list (E-mail) >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] The beast has been fed. 6dos now in >WS.surbl.org > > >I spoke with Bill Stearns and Chris Santerre separately by >phone,… [View More]

2 1

The beast has been fed. 6dos now in WS.surbl.org
by Chris Santerre 29 Jun '04

29 Jun '04

The '6dos' project domains have now been fed into ws.surbl.org. This is a huge collection of spam domains. The reason I did this now is the format is changing and it would have been a nightmare to do this later. I briefly looked thru them, but there are a LOT. I expect a few FPs. But for the shear number of domains you can't beat it. I will remove any reported FPs. Bill if you want to whitelist some if I can't get to them right away, go ahead. I will post when I remove, or if they are … [View More]

2 3

ws / be / bigevil.cf
by Mariano Absatz 29 Jun '04

29 Jun '04

Hi, according to http://www.surbl.org/lists.html#be be.surbl.org is deprecated and ws.surbl.org has the data from bigevil.cf. Does that mean that if I use 'ws.surbl.org' I can stop using bigevil.cf altogether? Or are there reasons to keep using bigevil.cf even when I use ws.surbl.org? Regards. -- Mariano Absatz El Baby ---------------------------------------------------------- When I was kidnapped, my parents snapped into action. They rented out my room. -- Woody Allen

2 1

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Re: [SARE] Bigevil IMPORTANT update/test.
by Chris Santerre 28 Jun '04

28 Jun '04

I will be coming out with a wildcard BE. But not for a while. I have to finish a ton of stuff. DOn't worry, I'm sure there will be a grand announcment. ;) --Chris >-----Original Message----- >From: Andy Jezierski [mailto:ajezierski@stepan.com] >Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 12:30 PM >To: Chris Santerre >Cc: SURBL Discussion list (E-mail); Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail) >Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] Re: [SARE] Bigevil IMPORTANT update/test. > > > > > > >Chris … [View More]

1 0

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] ob and ab added to multi.surbl.org, docs upda ted for multi use
by Chris Santerre 28 Jun '04

28 Jun '04

>Nah. go ahead and announce! other products will want to use >it, no need for them to wait for SpamAssassin. ;) OUCH, thats not funny! ;) --Chris

1 0

RE: [SARE] Bigevil IMPORTANT update/test.
by Chris Santerre 28 Jun '04

28 Jun '04

Yes this is exactly what will be happening. There will be a dynamic only bigevil. Not only looking for domain names. But things like directory names in a recent spam campaign, or anything else in common with a recent spam storm. No time set yet for this to happen. But it will be a whole different ruleset. I need to finish the set I'm working on now. --Chris >-----Original Message----- >From: Jesse Regier [mailto:jregier@accesshub.com] >Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 6:13 PM >To: … [View More]

1 0

Re: [SARE] Bigevil IMPORTANT update/test.
by John Wilcock 28 Jun '04

28 Jun '04

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 17:13:03 -0500, Jesse Regier wrote: > BIGBIGEVIL: generated from the surbl list > WILDLYEVIL: Wildcard only domains > > and keep BIGEVIL the way it is for a few months or so? > > I am currently using ws.surbl.org and the current BIGEVIL list > via rules_du_jour on several servers. (I wanted to keep the wildcard domains.) > If a lot of people are doing this they could be taken by surprise when the > BIGEVIL list suddelnly gets bigger. Seconded.… [View More]

1 0

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Please test ob, ob2, ab
by Joseph Burford 28 Jun '04

28 Jun '04

> > ob2.surbl.org > > Please beta test it against ob.surbl.org Jeff, Data from my test box is below, hope this helps. 25/06/2004 - 3,756 messages 1,816 marked as spam Description Total Ham % Spam % URL in ws.surbl.org 802 9 1.1 793 98.9 URL in ob.surbl.org 711 10 1.4 701 98.6 URL in sc.surbl.org 621 1 0.2 620 99.8 URL in ob2.surbl.org 617 1 0.2 616 99.8 URL in ab.surbl.org 377 6 1.6 371 98.4 URL in be.surbl.org 44 0 0 44 … [View More]

2 1

Multiple URIs
by David Coulson 27 Jun '04

27 Jun '04

I sent myself an e-mail with two URIs, two different domains, which are in a number of surbl lists (sc, ws and ob specificly). However, only the first domain was actually 'caught' and included in the spam filter report in SA (2.63). Shouldn't each specific domain which is included in a SURBL be used to establish a score? I know it's unusual for a spam to include a URI for two different domains, but shouldn't it increase the score anyway? David

4 4

[SURBL-Discuss] ob and ab added to multi.surbl.org, docs updated for multi use
by Jeff Chan 27 Jun '04

27 Jun '04

We've added the content from ab and ob into multi.surbl.org, so it now has all the currently active lists: http://www.surbl.org/lists.html with the following bitmasks representing the different lists: 2 = comes from sc.surbl.org 4 = comes from ws.surbl.org (and be.surbl.org) 8 = comes from phishing list (labelled as ph in multi) 16 = comes from ob.surbl.org 32 = comes from ab.surbl.org I've also updated the SURBL Quick Start page: http://www.surbl.org/quickstart.html to link to … [View More]

2 2

[SURBL-Discuss] One resource in identifying spammers trying to use your service
by William Stearns 26 Jun '04

26 Jun '04

Good afternoon, administrator, Thanks for providing the tinyurl service - the links you provide are a lot easier to type. I'd like to offer one free resource to you in trying to keep your system from being abused by spammers. I maintain a blacklist of spam domains at http://www.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/ ; the specific file you'll probably want is http://www.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/sa-blacklist.current.domains . This is a list of ~22,700 spammer domains. Would you consider checking the … [View More]

1 0

[SURBL-Discuss] Please test: ob.surbl.org - Outblaze spamvertised sites
by Jeff Chan 26 Jun '04

26 Jun '04

Please start testing: ob.surbl.org on your low-volume mail servers. Currently it's hosted only on a few name servers, so please don't put it into production on any high volume mail servers yet. We are particularly interested in hearing your False Positive rates. If the testing is successful we will ask the rest of our name servers to carry it, document it, announce it, etc. This list has about 40k domains on it. We still looking for ways to prune it down, for example by expiring … [View More]domains that no longer resolve. If someone had a reliable master list of expired domains, that could be very helpful. The data for this list is kindly supplied by Outblaze, and they use it internally for blocking spams. Here is how Yusuf Goolamabbas describes the data sources: __ We gather the domains 4 different ways: 1) spam complaints that have been handled by a human (postmaster/abuse/support people who actually see the spam). for the next 3, "new" is defined as: Whois reports the domain as newly registered(registered within last 90 days) 2) crawling thru our undeliverable outbound queues. When we get spam from a domain (mailFrom), some bounces are generated. These bounces are handled by a central queue. That central queue is looked at every 60 minutes to see where emails are bound to. If the domain they are bound to is "new" - the domain is blocked. 3) spamtrap body analysis: We have an extensive set of spamtraps. The emails to these accounts are analysed and URLs are extracted. For any domain found in these emails, we check for "new" and if so, its blocked. 4) spam complaint body analysis: Similar to spamcop/yahoo/AOL, we have a feature that allows our users to complain about individual emails "This is spam". All these complaints are analysed and URLs extracted from bodies. If any of these are "new", they are automatically blocked. We currently do not have a whitelist as we have never needed it. Several things prevent the need for a whitelist: a) humans that are allowed to do the blocks know what they are doing :-) b) machines that are doing the blocks will only block based on "new" c) machines cannot block any domain that was previously blocked and then unblocked by human. We do not currently remove/expire domains automatically although its under consideration. Removal procedure is by contacting postmaster at outblaze.com __ We are working with Outblaze to not include some of the domains that are less appropriate for SURBLs, but so far the data looks like it could be quite useful. Please give it a try and let us know what you find. Thanks, Jeff C. -- Jeff Chan mailto:jeffc@surbl.org http://www.surbl.org/ [View Less]

5 8

Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Hello
by Dave Navarro 26 Jun '04

26 Jun '04

At 6/25/2004, you wrote: >What lists did you tst, and in what way? I think quantity should not >matter, but quality does. Overhere its catching up 73% of my spam, i dont >see any other RBL doing that currently. Which lists are you checking against? I'm getting between a 10% and 20% catch rate. If I change my code to check both the domain and the IP address for each domain, that goes up to around 30%. I added code that allows me to add my own domains and IP's to a private … [View More]

3 2

Re: Please test ob, ob2, ab
by Alden Levy 26 Jun '04

26 Jun '04

FWIW, I haven't had any fp's, and I've been testing all three since they were released to this list. Of course, I only get about 100-200 spam per day (and 50-100 ham) on my domains. Thanks for all of your hard work! SURBL really reduced my unmarked spam considerably (~75%) over what slipped through with just MS and SA. Regards, Alden Alden Levy Engine No. 9, Inc. 130 W. 57th Street, Suite 12E New York, NY 10019 (212) 981-1122 (212) 725-7202 fax

2 1

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] One resource in identifying spammers trying t o use your service
by Chris Santerre 26 Jun '04

26 Jun '04

Did something like this go to tinyurl.com? Great work Bill! --Chris >-----Original Message----- >From: William Stearns [mailto:wstearns@pobox.com] >Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 12:48 PM >To: contact(a)littleurl.com >Cc: ml-surbl-discuss >Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] One resource in identifying spammers trying to >use your service > > >Good afternoon, administrator, > Thanks for providing the littleurl service - the links >you provide >are a lot easier to … [View More]

3 2

Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Please test ob, ob2, ab
by jm＠jmason.org 26 Jun '04

26 Jun '04

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 My results, testing ph while I was at it: : jm 1351...; grep -v " 0\.500 " freqs OVERALL% SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME 121405 22516 98889 0.185 0.00 0.00 (all messages) 100.000 18.5462 81.4538 0.185 0.00 0.00 (all messages as %) 13.453 70.3766 0.4925 0.993 1.00 1.00 SURBL_WS 3.807 20.3811 0.0334 0.998 0.50 1.00 SURBL_SC 2.650 14.2565 0.0071 1.000 0.50 1.00 … [View More]

4 6

RE: [SARE] Bigevil IMPORTANT update/test.
by Chris Santerre 25 Jun '04

25 Jun '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Andy Jezierski [mailto:ajezierski@stepan.com] >Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 12:30 PM >To: Chris Santerre >Cc: SURBL Discussion list (E-mail); Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail) >Subject: Re: [SARE] Bigevil IMPORTANT update/test. > > > > > > >Chris Santerre <csanterre(a)MerchantsOverseas.com> wrote on 06/25/2004 >11:21:20 AM: > >> I have no idea how this will effect systems under heavy load. Those >systems >… [View More]

1 0

[SURBL-Discuss] One resource in identifying spammers trying to use your service
by William Stearns 25 Jun '04

25 Jun '04

Good afternoon, administrator, Thanks for providing the littleurl service - the links you provide are a lot easier to type. I'd like to offer one free resource to you in trying to keep your system from being abused by spammers. I maintain a blacklist of spam domains at http://www.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/ ; the specific file you'll probably want is http://www.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/sa-blacklist.current.domains . This is a list of ~22,700 spammer domains. Would you consider checking … [View More]

1 0

OT: RBL needed!
by Doc Schneider 25 Jun '04

25 Jun '04

This Off topic but figured most of us all get hit with this stuff. I am in need of a bit of help. I got a whole bunch of open relays doing rumpelstiltskin(sic) attacks on both my main mailserver and my seconary MX server... hitting the secondary and making it throttle the main one. Anyway is there a way to use some of these RBLs to basically deny these open relays to be able to even attempt these attacks? I'm running Sendmail 8.12.11 on Linux... both these boxen run RH 6.2 and are … [View More]

4 5

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] A question on policy
by Chris Santerre 25 Jun '04

25 Jun '04

Why are you reading here? Content inline below.....go ahead...go read..... >-----Original Message----- >From: David Hooton [mailto:djh-lists@platformhosting.com] >Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 5:11 PM >To: 'SURBL Discussion list' >Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] A question on policy > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: discuss-bounces(a)lists.surbl.org [mailto:discuss- >> bounces(a)lists.surbl.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Chan >> Sent: Friday, 25 June … [View More]

1 0

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Hello
by Chris Santerre 25 Jun '04

25 Jun '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Dave Navarro [mailto:dave@basicguru.com] >Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 11:50 PM >To: discuss(a)lists.surbl.org >Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] Hello > > >Hi, > >I originally found the SURBL site through CPU magazine. I've >done some >testing with it and I find that the number of domains listed is pretty >sparse. Is this project still active? > >--Dave > Oh yeah, we are picking up steam everyday. This started … [View More]

2 1

Please test ob, ob2, ab
by Jeff Chan 25 Jun '04

25 Jun '04

Yusuf and Suresh of Outblaze have provided a different version of the Outblaze data which excludes some sender domains which are not really relevant to SURBL use. I've put the revised list up as: ob2.surbl.org Please beta test it against ob.surbl.org Please also test ab.surbl.org which are the top 425 or so spamvertised sites from abusebutler.com. So please beta test: ob.surbl.org ob2.surbl.org ab.surbl.org and let us know the results here. ob2 and ab are only on my name … [View More]

3 9

Hello
by Dave Navarro 25 Jun '04

25 Jun '04

Hi, I originally found the SURBL site through CPU magazine. I've done some testing with it and I find that the number of domains listed is pretty sparse. Is this project still active? --Dave

3 2

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss