Yeah this is a definite candidate for SURBL. This is the
Huntsville-consulting spam gang:
http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL20528
353+ domains diretly linked. This is going to be the next trend. The final
destination of this pron spam was throatstuffers . com, but it used a throw
away domain of marlacell . com as a forwarder. Not directly either. That
domain simply hosted a mirrored page of throatstuffers . com.
We are seeing an increase in throw away domains being used to reroute to
other domains that will NEVER show up directly in a spam. All in attempts to
get passed SURBL. No biggy, the more pople that submit and manage SURBL the
faster they get added.
However there has been discussion on blocking the final destinations via web
proxy's and host files. I think we will begin to see an increase in
companies blocking these IPs or domains at the firewall or proxy server.
Its actually helping some antispammers. We are able to tie more spammers
together thru looking at who is trying to get passed SURBL thru throw away
domains. Some of the small guys are only rogues of the bigger ones. We got
people watching spammers six ways from Sunday. Funny how much they don't
realise we know ;)
--Chris
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Smart,Dan [mailto:SmartD@VMCMAIL.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 4:57 PM
>To: spamassassin-users(a)incubator.apache.org
>Subject: RE: Image Composition Analysis
>
>
>Attached is the spam that got through. I changed the porn URL to not
>offend. It's a little mangled as it was forwarded by the user
>via Outlook,
>and tags got mangled by my Sanitizer.
>
>I capture the headers of all files, and here is what they look
>like. The
>bayes = 0 is what got this through.
>
><<Dan>>
>
>========================================
>From filter Wed Nov 3 01:29:14 2004
>Return-Path: <Bebeskbs(a)kmanus.com>
>Received: from great.amberalist.com (great.amberalist.com
>[209.200.9.222])
> by dalton.vul.com (Vulcan E-mail Relay) with SMTP id 56BD89BB2C
> for <xxxxxxx(a)vmcmail.com>; Wed, 3 Nov 2004 01:29:14
>-0600 (CST)
>Received: from mail pickup service by kmanus.com with
>Microsoft SMTPSVC;
> Wed, 3 Nov 2004 14:17:54 -0800
>Received: from 194.3.74.35 by by7fd.bay7.kmanus.com with HTTP;
> Wed, 3 Nov 2004 14:17:54 GMT
>X-Originating-IP: [194.3.74.35]
>X-Originating-Email: [Bebeskbs(a)kmanus.com]
>X-Sender: Bebeskbs(a)kmanus.com
>From: Bebe <Bebeskbs(a)kmanus.com>
>To: XXXXX <XXXXXXX(a)vmcmail.com>
>Subject: re: our appreciation
>Date: 3 Nov 2004 14:17:54 -0500
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-type: text/html
>Message-ID: <SR0-81197F1166274AB5A8701DBB47173D6E(a)kmanus.com>
>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on
>dalton.vul.com
>X-Spam-DCC: : dalton 1182; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
>X-Spam-AWL: Auto_Whitelist=
>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=6.5
>tests=BAYES_00,CP_RANDOMWORD_10,
> HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_NO_CHARSET,MIME_HTML_ONLY,OB_URI_RBL,
> RCVD_IN_SBL,SARE_HTML_FSIZE_1ALL,WS_URI_RBL autolearn=no
>version=2.64
>X-Spam-Level: *
>Status: RO
>X-Status:
>X-Keywords:
>X-UID: 1219
>
>======================================
><<Dan>>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Andersen [mailto:jsa@pen.homeip.net]
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 2:45 AM
>> To: spamassassin-users(a)incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Image Composition Analysis
>>
>> On Tuesday 30 November 2004 01:27 pm, Smart,Dan wrote:
>>
>> > Catching image only E-mail with pornographic images is
>> really difficult.
>> > My users are offended when they get one, and wonder how I
>> could not
>> > catch it. Explaining that the document was text, filled
>with bayes
>> > poison, and the one porn image with no porn words in the document
>> > doesn't seem to have much of an impression on them.
>>
>> Open the image with a text editor and challenge them to
>> determine if it is spam or not.
>>
>> Really, people this dumb should not be turned loose on the internet.
>>
>> --
>> _____________________________________
>> John Andersen
>>
>
>
3
2
FP: rgc3.net
by Rob McEwen (PowerView Systems)
01 Dec '04
01 Dec '04
Potential False Positive:
If found the following in a header of an e-mail that was a legitimate Realtor.com/HomeStore newsletter:
rgc3.net
Examine e-mail here:
http://www.pvsys.com/fp.txt
(I know that SURBL is not suppose to be used to check headers... but this still raises a red flag that this domain would be found in such a legit newsletter)
Thanks,
Rob McEwen
Shows up on this page
http://www.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/sa-blacklist.current.domains
Paul Schwarz
-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces(a)lists.surbl.org
[mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Chan
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 11:06 AM
To: Paul Schwarz
Cc: 'SURBL Discussion list'
Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] virtumundo.com
On Wednesday, December 1, 2004, 6:47:37 AM, Paul Schwarz wrote:
> Why doesn't multi.surbl.org stop
> virtumundo.com
> It is listed in the ws.surbl.org if I look it up manually
> the online surbl lookup tool doesn't detect it either.
It's not listed for me:
% dig virtumundo.com.ws.surbl.org a
; <<>> DiG 8.3 <<>> virtumundo.com.ws.surbl.org a ;; res options: init
recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 10041 ;; flags: qr aa
rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUERY SECTION:
;; virtumundo.com.ws.surbl.org, type = A, class = IN
Jeff C.
--
"If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Thank you for your response !
Who on this list was using greylisting and then decided to turn it off.
Looking for more feedback.
What rates of spam detection are you getting with surbl ? And what methods
do you use to complement it. I would like to run some RFC checks but some
of them seem to stringent.... I.E - Reverse PTR checks, etc
Thanks again !
Paul Schwarz
Stark Truss Company, Inc.
Senior Network Administrator
(330) 478-2100
-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces(a)lists.surbl.org
[mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org] On Behalf Of Chris Santerre
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 9:53 AM
To: 'SURBL Discussion list'
Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Hi I'm new and I like SURBL
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Schwarz [mailto:Paul.Schwarz@starktruss.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 9:03 AM
>To: 'SURBL Discussion list'
>Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] Hi I'm new and I like SURBL
>
Greetings noob, I mean Paul :-)
>what are others thoughts of the effectiveness of SURBL , risks of false
>positives, CPU usage, etc
SURBL rocks, but I'm a bit partial. The risks of FP are low, and we strive
to get them to zero. And anything reported as an FP is dealt with right
away, by numerous people. We take them very seriously.
Lookups are quick and getting quicker with each new mirror added. If you
have a LOT of traffic you can rsync to get lookups local. Directions are on
the SURBL.org site.
>
>I'm currently doing my spam checking in this order
>
>sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org - reject at SMTP level standard greylisting SURBL
>- using multi.surbl.org
I like everything but greylisting. It can have some issues when a timely
email is needed. Particularly with airline info. We've seen it here from
another SURBL contributor.
>
>How are you guys doing it and do you have any suggestions ?
>Low false
>positives are my goal in my setup. I wondered if surbl should replace
>greylisting or RBL or should just complement.
Complement is always better, but if anything I would remove greylisting for
now. With SURBL I don't think you need it. But if you have the time and
don't mind waiting sometimes 20 minutes for some companies to resend, then
go ahead.
I think you will be very happy with SURBL.
Chris Santerre
System Admin and SARE Ninja
http://www.rulesemporium.comhttp://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
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Why doesn't multi.surbl.org stop
virtumundo.com
It is listed in the ws.surbl.org if I look it up manually
the online surbl lookup tool doesn't detect it either.
Paul Schwarz
Stark Truss Company, Inc.
Senior Network Administrator
(330) 478-2100
what are others thoughts of the effectiveness of SURBL , risks of false
positives, CPU usage, etc
I'm currently doing my spam checking in this order
sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org - reject at SMTP level
standard greylisting
SURBL - using multi.surbl.org
How are you guys doing it and do you have any suggestions ? Low false
positives are my goal in my setup. I wondered if surbl should replace
greylisting or RBL or should just complement.
thank you
Paul
Paul, if you are still interested in greylisting you might consider a
solution that allows you to run SpamAssassin at SMTP time. I use
sa-exim (I believe there are others for different MTAs) and this allows
me to greylist based on score. For example, if the score is above 3
points then it is greylisted, otherwise it is immediately let through.
However, I would go with Chris's suggestion first and see if you even
need to bother. In our situation, we have to be very liberal on the
score to keep the FP's down, so we use greylisting on the uncertainties.
Kris
-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces(a)lists.surbl.org
[mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org] On Behalf Of Chris Santerre
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 8:53 AM
To: 'SURBL Discussion list'
Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Hi I'm new and I like SURBL
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Schwarz [mailto:Paul.Schwarz@starktruss.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 9:03 AM
>To: 'SURBL Discussion list'
>Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] Hi I'm new and I like SURBL
>
Greetings noob, I mean Paul :-)
>what are others thoughts of the effectiveness of SURBL , risks of false
>positives, CPU usage, etc
SURBL rocks, but I'm a bit partial. The risks of FP are low, and we
strive
to get them to zero. And anything reported as an FP is dealt with right
away, by numerous people. We take them very seriously.
Lookups are quick and getting quicker with each new mirror added. If you
have a LOT of traffic you can rsync to get lookups local. Directions are
on
the SURBL.org site.
>
>I'm currently doing my spam checking in this order
>
>sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org - reject at SMTP level
>standard greylisting
>SURBL - using multi.surbl.org
I like everything but greylisting. It can have some issues when a timely
email is needed. Particularly with airline info. We've seen it here from
another SURBL contributor.
>
>How are you guys doing it and do you have any suggestions ?
>Low false
>positives are my goal in my setup. I wondered if surbl should replace
>greylisting or RBL or should just complement.
Complement is always better, but if anything I would remove greylisting
for
now. With SURBL I don't think you need it. But if you have the time and
don't mind waiting sometimes 20 minutes for some companies to resend,
then
go ahead.
I think you will be very happy with SURBL.
Chris Santerre
System Admin and SARE Ninja
http://www.rulesemporium.comhttp://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
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Schwarz [mailto:Paul.Schwarz@starktruss.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 9:03 AM
>To: 'SURBL Discussion list'
>Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] Hi I'm new and I like SURBL
>
Greetings noob, I mean Paul :-)
>what are others thoughts of the effectiveness of SURBL , risks of false
>positives, CPU usage, etc
SURBL rocks, but I'm a bit partial. The risks of FP are low, and we strive
to get them to zero. And anything reported as an FP is dealt with right
away, by numerous people. We take them very seriously.
Lookups are quick and getting quicker with each new mirror added. If you
have a LOT of traffic you can rsync to get lookups local. Directions are on
the SURBL.org site.
>
>I'm currently doing my spam checking in this order
>
>sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org - reject at SMTP level
>standard greylisting
>SURBL - using multi.surbl.org
I like everything but greylisting. It can have some issues when a timely
email is needed. Particularly with airline info. We've seen it here from
another SURBL contributor.
>
>How are you guys doing it and do you have any suggestions ?
>Low false
>positives are my goal in my setup. I wondered if surbl should replace
>greylisting or RBL or should just complement.
Complement is always better, but if anything I would remove greylisting for
now. With SURBL I don't think you need it. But if you have the time and
don't mind waiting sometimes 20 minutes for some companies to resend, then
go ahead.
I think you will be very happy with SURBL.
Chris Santerre
System Admin and SARE Ninja
http://www.rulesemporium.comhttp://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
I use multi.surbl.org to check the emails and wondered is there a whitelist
for each individual surbl list or one the encompasses them all ? Who
maintains it etc.
thanks much !
Paul Schwarz
Stark Truss Company, Inc.
Senior Network Administrator
(330) 478-2100