Discuss

discuss@lists.surbl.org

1862 discussions

More news on unparsed urls
by John Fawcett 25 Apr '04

25 Apr '04

I have tested SpamCopURI 0.14 and SA 2.63 with my collection of unparsed urls. This new version deals with many of the cases, so that the ugly workarounds I was using can be removed. By the way, if you're reading this Eric, it might be worthwhile adding ads.msn.com and g.msn.com to the list of known redirection services in the sample spamcop_uri.cf. Here are the cases that are not picked up: 1. URLs that aren't URLs (missing protocol, even missing www ) <p> P<advisory>l<aboveboard>e<compose>a<geochronology>s<moral>e<palfrey> <rada= r>c<symptomatic>o<yankee>p<conduit>y<souffle> <intake>a<arise>n<eocene>d <= thickish>paste <impact>this <broadloom>link <road>i<dichotomous>n<quinine>= t<scoreboard>o y<eager>o<impact>ur b<archenemy>r<band>o<wallop>wser <b> he= althyexchange.biz</b> 2. Double protocol http://http://www.eager-18.com/_7953f10b575a18d044cdec5a40bd4f22//?d=vision Workaround in PerMsgStatus.pm $uri =~ s/http:\/\/http:\/\//http:\/\//gi; (NB from the previously published workaround I added case insensitivity) 3. HTML escape sequences in URL http://toform.net/mcp/879/1352/cap112.html Workaround in PerMsgStatus.pm $_ = HTML::Entities::decode($_); use HTML::Entities; (NB from the previously published workaround this is different because it does the conversion earlier on and so takes into account that http could also be coded with escape sequences. It seems to work despite the comment to not modify $_ in get_uri_list.) Here's a diff of PerMSgStatus.pm with SpamCopURI 0.14 compared to the version with the workarounds mentioned above. John diff -u PerMsgStatus.pm.orig PerMsgStatus.pm -----------cut------------- --- PerMsgStatus.pm.orig 2004-04-25 12:50:05.000000000 +0200 +++ PerMsgStatus.pm 2004-04-25 13:01:11.000000000 +0200 @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ use Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf; use Mail::SpamAssassin::Received; use Mail::SpamAssassin::Util; +use HTML::Entities; use constant HAS_MIME_BASE64 => eval { require MIME::Base64; }; @@ -1748,6 +1749,7 @@ for (@$textary) { # NOTE: do not modify $_ in this loop + $_ = HTML::Entities::decode($_); while (/($uriRe)/go) { my $uri = $1; @@ -1776,6 +1778,7 @@ $uri = "${base_uri}$uri"; } } + $uri =~ s/http:\/\/http:\/\//http:\/\//gi; # warn("Got URI: $uri\n"); push @uris, $uri; -----------------cut---------------

1 0

domains that roll out of sc.surbl.org
by John Fawcett 24 Apr '04

24 Apr '04

Just a thought: given the dynamic nature of the sc.surbl.org data, it might be useful to have a listing history for the SURBL+ checker (http://www.rulesemporium.com/cgi-bin/uribl.cgi) Something along the lines of domain xxxx currently (listed|notl listed) in sc.surbl.org - added ddmmyyyy hhmm - removed ddmmyyyy hhmm - added ddmmyyyy hhmm - removed ddmmyyyy hhmm This way it would be possible to check whether old domains are being left dormant until they work their way out of the list and then being resurrected later on. Another thought was to make a separate historic list of domains that are removed from sc.surbl.org when there are no new reports. People who want to do more aggressive filtering could also use the historic list in addition to the other lists. The risk of FPs is still low because I can't forsee there being many "reformed" spammer domains. John

2 1

RE: [RulesEmporium] Rbldns and wildcards
by Dallas L. Engelken 24 Apr '04

24 Apr '04

> Indeed, I just realized an embarrassing screw-up on my part. > > There are two different programs with similar names and > slightly different properties,including zone file differences: > > rbldns > > rbldnsd > > We are using rbldnsd zone files. I need to update the web site > to reflect this and post an announcement. > As am I.. I guess I didn't realize there was a rbldns either... In rbldnsd, you can wildcard domains... From # man rbldnsd dnset Set of (possible wildcarded) domain names with associated A and TXT values. Similar to ip4set, but instead of IP addresses, data consists of domain names (not in reverse form). One domain name per line, possible starting with wildcard (either with starâdot (*.) or just a dot). Entry starting with exclamation sign is exclusion. Default value for all subsequent lines may be specified by a line starting with a colon. Wildcards are interpreted as follows: example.com only example.com domain is listed, not subdomains thereof. Not a wildcard entry. *.example.com all subdomains of example.com are listed, but not examâ ple.com itself. .example.com all subdomains of example.com and example.com itself are listed. This is a shortcut: to list a domain name itself and all itâs subdomains, one may either specify two lines (example.com and *.example.com), or one line (.examâ ple.com). Instead of listing FQDN's, why not just list the TLD with a dot in front... For example, list .mailnotice.biz instead of t.mailnotice.biz in case they change to some other letter in front of their TLD. Dallas

2 1

rbldnsd and rsync'ing
by Roger WJ Alterskjær 24 Apr '04

24 Apr '04

Hi all! I've successfully installed rbldnsd and want to set it up along with rsync'ing of sc/ws/be.surbl.org. My question is how to set up the RBLDNSD variable in /etc/sysconfig/rbldnsd and the rsync crontab. So far I've got a tip on rsync: Rsyncing is very easy. You would set up a cron job to call something like: rsync RSYNC_SERVER_NAME_GOES_HERE::surbl/sc.surbl.org.rbldns . Seams simple enough. It's just that darn rbldnsd variable that's got me confused. -- Mvh, Roger WJ Alterskjær Edb-konsulent Vitenskapsmuseet, NTNU

1 0

Fwd: Re: Goofy domain names
by Jeff Chan 24 Apr '04

24 Apr '04

From: Jeff Chan To: spamassassin-users Date: Friday, April 23, 2004, 3:28:49 PM Subject: Goofy domain names ===8<==============Original message text=============== On Friday, April 23, 2004, 7:38:46 AM, Chris Santerre wrote: > This is where BigEvil may start going. I can change mine in 2 secs to use > /\d00\dhosting/ but as soon as I do that, it will be removed from > be.surbl.org. For obvious reasons they can't use wildcards. All signs point > to me changing bigevil over to search for this kind of stuff, and simply add > any static ones I have to ws.surbl.org. But will see. This is where our philosophies clash slightly. SURBLs just want a list of known spam domains. SA rulesets with wildcards try to match entire possible/probable classes of domain names based on observing prior types of variation. Both approaches have their merits. For my purposes, I'd just prefer to get the domains that have already been found in spam. I acknowledge that that doesn't have the predictive value of the class approach, but it also makes FPs less possible in principle. (Though in reality it's not very likely that any legitimate sites are suddenly going to start using rxmeds1.com, rxmeds2.com, rxmeds3.com, etc.) Jeff C. ===8<===========End of original message text===========

3 4

Re: [RulesEmporium] Rbldns and wildcards
by Jeff Chan 24 Apr '04

24 Apr '04

Indeed, I just realized an embarrassing screw-up on my part. There are two different programs with similar names and slightly different properties,including zone file differences: rbldns rbldnsd We are using rbldnsd zone files. I need to update the web site to reflect this and post an announcement. Jeff C. __ On Friday, April 23, 2004, 4:23:48 PM, Chris Santerre wrote: > not sure so I've cc'd the big guy on this one. >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Dallas L. Engelken [mailto:dallase@nmgi.com] >>Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 4:27 PM >>To: >>Subject: [RulesEmporium] Rbldns and wildcards >> >> >>What is the recommended 'type' of zone for running bigevil via rbldns.. >>'dnset' ? >> >>If dnset is recommended, why arent a lot of the entries in be.surbl.org >>listed as >> >>.domain.com instead of domain.com to cover the TLD and all sub domains? >>I probably missed this discussing didn't I.... >> >> -- Jeff Chan mailto:jeffc@surbl.org-nospam http://www.surbl.org/

1 1

[SURBL-Discuss] Re: [SURBL-Announce] ANNOUNCE: The SARE SURBL+ Checker v0.4
by Ralph Seichter 24 Apr '04

24 Apr '04

> [Linked from the surbl site also... -- Jeff C.] Ok Jeff, you caught me in the middle of a mail asking for this "lookup link", so where is the web cam you installed? ;-) -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Yours sincerely Dipl. Inform. Ralph Seichter HORUS-IT Ahornweg 10 D-57635 Oberirsen Tel +49 2686 987880 Fax +49 2686 987889 http://horus-it.de/

2 1

[SURBL-Discuss] Re: [SURBL-Announce] ANNOUNCE: Mail::SpamAsssassin::SpamCopURI 0.11
by Jeff Chan 24 Apr '04

24 Apr '04

On Tuesday, April 20, 2004, 10:51:55 PM, Eric Kolve wrote: > I have just released SpamCopURI version 0.11. This fixes a few > bugs that had been reported and adds open redirect resolution. > This basically takes a URL from say rd.yahoo.com and attempts > to resolve the Location header without ever fetching from > the potential spammy site. > Only the URLs that have hosts that match an address list get > redirect resolution. As well, redirect resolution is off > by default, but can be enabled in the conf file. I have > placed several open redirect sites in the conf file. > The basic requirement is that the redirect return a 300 > level HTTP response when fetching. I placed google.com > in there even though they don't have their own redirect > domain, but this should be fairly safe since most if not > all google URLs are either redirects or searches. Give > it a try and tell me what you think. This is all dependent > upon LWP, but if you don't have LWP everything else > will function as it did before. Eric, you may want to share your redirection resolution strategies with the 3.0 developers. I haven't heard Justin getting beyond patterns yet. ;-) Jeff C.

3 5

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] How effective is SURBL?
by Chris Santerre 23 Apr '04

23 Apr '04

I use sa-stats.pl It isn't like what I'm talking about. Working with the SA devs to keep an outputed DB of score hits. Not logging each hit. But updating a counter. --Chris >-----Original Message----- >From: Doc Schneider [mailto:maddoc@maddoc.net] >Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 3:35 PM >To: SURBL Discussion list >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] How effective is SURBL? > > > > >Chris Santerre wrote: > >>>>What tools are people using to see what are the most hit rulesets? >>> >>>I've been thinking of writing a tool to check out some of >>>those rulesets >>>the spammy crap hits on. >>> >>>Figured if nothing else it would be fun! 8*)) >>> >>> >>> >>>-Doc >> >> >> How about working with the devs to have a function in SA to >dump rule hits >> into a seperate log? Just rule hits. I'd buy that for a dollar! > >Which Developers? I'm game to do something like this. I know there is >already one for SA. sa-stats.pl or some such. Too bad it never has >worked for me. (probably missing a module or something) Ork! > >But hey I sure can whip something up if there is an interest. > >-Doc (Brushes off his coding skills)(needs more WD-40) > >_______________________________________________ >Discuss mailing list >Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org >http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >

2 1

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] How effective is SURBL?
by Chris Santerre 23 Apr '04

23 Apr '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Doc Schneider [mailto:maddoc@maddoc.net] >Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 2:05 PM >To: SURBL Discussion list >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] How effective is SURBL? > > > > > > What tools are people using to see what are the most hit rulesets? > >I've been thinking of writing a tool to check out some of >those rulesets >the spammy crap hits on. > >Figured if nothing else it would be fun! 8*)) > > > >-Doc How about working with the devs to have a function in SA to dump rule hits into a seperate log? Just rule hits. I'd buy that for a dollar! --Chris

3 3

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