Discuss

discuss@lists.surbl.org

1862 discussions

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Pleaae beta test ds.surbl.org - 6dos data
by Chris Santerre 29 Jun '04

29 Jun '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 1:21 AM >To: SURBL Discuss >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Pleaae beta test ds.surbl.org - 6dos data > > >On Monday, June 28, 2004, 7:46:16 PM, David Coulson wrote: >> Jeff Chan wrote: >>> Please do not use ds.surbl.org for production mail servers as it >>> is hosted only on my name server. > >> Even though it took a day to load (almost), I've got it >running on ns10 >> if you want to add that to the NS glue. > >Thanks David. I'd like to see what kind of false positive rates >we see before committing to running it for real. > >As a data point, 6dos hit 300 whitelist entries out of 120,000 >records, which is about a ten times greater whitelist hit *rate* >than ob.surbl.org. > 0.25% fp rate, so it has an S/O rating of 99.75 :) Actually that is great info. Can we get the whitelist hits? This might be a great way to tweak the 6dos list. I'm also very interested in who hit the whitelist. I'd like to see the xref in 6dos to see who these people are dealing with. I think RSK would be interested as well. Even if we have to clean up 1-2% of these listed, look how many evil domains we get. But I fully understand your philosophy on this Jeff. Some of these evil domains may not have spammed.....yet. ;) --Chris

2 1

Just to say thanks
by David Thurman 29 Jun '04

29 Jun '04

We are using the spamcop_uri with the 3 main feeds, ws, ob, ab and the main man and we are seeing a reduction of 4-5 in our mail box in the mornings to 1, of course all the other junk is nailed with SA. Great idea and a great addition to fighting the ads for pills, my small p*nis and my girlfriends undersized headlight notifications as well as the fact that I am approved for high interest loans. I am so gullible that I now can rest easy knowing I won't be taken ;) Thanks to the SURLB team... -- David Thurman The Web Presence Group http://www.the-presence.com Web Development/E-Commerce/CMS/Hosting/Dedicated Servers 800-399-6441/309-679-0774

2 1

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] rDNS entries
by Chris Santerre 29 Jun '04

29 Jun '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Dave Navarro [mailto:dave@basicguru.com] >Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 12:53 AM >To: discuss(a)lists.surbl.org >Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] rDNS entries > > >One thing I notice is that the IP addresses of blacklisted >domains are not >always listed in the BL as well. > >For example, when I look up: > > ghcclccc.biz.multi.surbl.org > >It's listed. However, when I look up: > > 72.2.139.221.multi.surbl.org > >it's not listed. > >Might I suggest that all domains listed in the BL also include >corresponding IP addresses? > That might hurt a lot of virtually hosted and legit sites. We only list IPs if a spam URL explicitly lists the IP. --Chris

3 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 >> 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 spammers and the >> whitelist needs to be removed. > >> This is a great addition. And NO I can't tell you the source >of the '6dos' >> project. You will just have to contact me with any questions :) > >NO!!!!!!! DO NOT DO THIS. Stop yelling or I'll start calling you my wife ;) DOn't think I won't.....honey! :P > >Rich's list is way too big and inaccurate for our use in terms >of false positives. It will ruin SURBLs and people's use of them. Yes and no. But have a look at the file I posted. > >The huge list is probably the reason Bill's server is choking >now. Damn I hope it wasn't the list that killed it! That would suck! But size wise it didn't look any bigger then some of the other lists people had submitted. But I have no problems making this a seperate SURBL list. The data is very good once you look at it. Sorry if I seem testy. I'm on a 3 week schedule of no Hockey. I'm ready to kill at a moments notice :) --Chris

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, and what we came up with is to put the 6dos data into a >new, separate list, reflecting that it's a larger data source >with a different philosophy behind it. It tends to be more >inclusive than some of the other lists, meaning it may have >greater potential for false positives. And at about 80,000 >entries, it's clearly a larger list then our others, which >currently max out at about 20,000 for ob and ws (natively). >The 80,000 records in 6dos probably have *not* been hand-checked. > >Chris expressed that he's becoming more comfortable using 6dos >since the author has been adding some more cross-checking of the >data, but we all agreed the data may be better in a separate >list. Maybe I'll call it 6d or 6dos.surbl.org. > >By the way Bill's server is being worked on right now, so >we don't have the ability to update ws to disable the 6dos >inclusion. Chris will do that when he's able to next. > >Until then I've reverted ws.surbl.org to an older version of >the list that I had from three days ago. That should be >reasonably close to the pre-6dos version that was being >served before. > >Jeff C. > >_______________________________________________ >Discuss mailing list >Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org >http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >

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 spammers and the whitelist needs to be removed. This is a great addition. And NO I can't tell you the source of the '6dos' project. You will just have to contact me with any questions :) So the beast has been fed a proper dinner. Be ready for a few burps! Chris Santerre System Admin and SARE Ninja http://www.rulesemporium.com http://www.surbl.org 'It is not the strongest of the species that survives, not the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.' Charles Darwin

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 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 >> should definitely stay with SURBL as this is just a local >regex copy of >it. >> But for those systems that can't/won't use SURBL and want a >local copy of >> this larger bigevil here is the link: (~600k) >> > >Will you be coming up with a MiniEvil that contains just the wildcard >rules? Or have all the wildcard sites been added to surbl >individually? > >Andy > >_______________________________________________ >Discuss mailing list >Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org >http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >

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

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss