I agree with Jonathan, these guys should be whitelisted.
--Chris
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Hall J D (ISeLS) [mailto:jdhall@glam.ac.uk]
>Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 7:41 AM
>To: csanterre(a)merchantsoverseas.com
>Subject: False positive on Big Evil
>
>
>Hello Chris,
>
>I seem to be getting a false positive in the current
>BigEvil.cf for http://emailuniverse.com
>
>They are an e-mail list hints and tips site. They're lists
>seem to require a confirmation e-mail to subscribe to their
>lists. My user who reported the false positive has confirmed
>that she did sign up for the list so it's not unsolicited.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jonathan
>
On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 1:43:58 PM, Rob McEwen wrote:
> What is the TTL for the ob.surbl.org list?
The TTL on ob is 6 hours. Maybe we should lower that.
> Also, is the TTL for the multi.surbl.org list still
> 6 hours? Could/will that ever be improved?
Good question. RFCing lowering the TTL on multi was
one of the things on my list of things to do... I'll
ask now....
Jeff C.
Hello,
I just read about the new multi.surbl.org, and was wondering about its
bitmask properties. Can you call multi.surbl.org with a multi-bitmask? Like
00111110? (127.0.0.62). To mean "Any of 2,4,8,16,32"? Probably not; but that
would be real useful.
Thanks,
- Mark
Jeff C. wrote:
> Outblaze in particular seems to get domains quickly and
> have a relatively low FP rate....
Great!
What is the TTL for the ob.surbl.org list?
Also, is the TTL for the multi.surbl.org list still
6 hours? Could/will that ever be improved?
I'm still finding some spam getting through which shows up
on the MULTI list the next day. Therefore, I'm thinking about
checking BOTH multi.surbl.org AND ob.surbl.org. The
idea is that, even though they overlap, I could catch
everything but the newest stuff with multi.surbl.org
and then possibly catch some newer stuff on ob.surbl.org
that hasn't yet made it into the multi-surbl.org list.
Follow?
I read on an earlier post something about a newer SURBL version which more quickly matches a new domain submission with that particular spammer's past data so as to lower the threshhold (of # of reports) it takes for a known spammer hiding behind a new domain name to get blacklisted.
Does anyone have an estimate about when this new system will be put into production.
Rob M.
>70_sc_top200.cf You could remove.
>antidrug.cf remove this when you upgrade to SA 3.0
>backhair.cf remove this when you upgrade to SA 3.0
>bigevil.cf REMOVE!
>chickenpox.cf remove this when you upgrade to SA 3.0
>evilrules.cf REMOVE very old!
--Chris