Discuss

discuss@lists.surbl.org

1867 discussions

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Revised DMOZ data, got Wikipedia domains too
by Chris Santerre 14 Oct '04

14 Oct '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 3:10 AM >To: SURBL Discussion list >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Revised DMOZ data, got Wikipedia domains >too > > >On Friday, October 8, 2004, 11:37:03 PM, Alex Broens wrote: >> tripod and geocities have given spammers a home for many years... and >> there's many other freehosters who have become "victims" as well. > >> if not permitted to blacklist, at least treat as 2nd level >tld so we can >> get rid of the spam coming from them > >That's possible, but not something we've done so far. I don't >see shared domain hosting as a major spam destination. Maybe >they are a minor annoyance, but nothing like the pill spammers >hosted in China, Korea, Brazil, etc. > >The difference is that geocities, tripod, angelfire, etc. ought >to have some incentive to get rid of these minor abusers since >they make so little money from them. The pill/mortgage/warez/etc. >spam hosters probably make a lot more money from their spamming >customers, so they have an incentive too keep them. > >In the case where there is some legitimate company like Yahoo >or Lycos (parents of geocities, tripod, etc) to police their >customers and enforce their AUPs, then spam victims should >report them and let them do the enforcing. Since these >companies are mostly legitimate and probably do spend some >resources dealing with abuse, they have an incentive to >reduce abuse since it probably costs them more money than >it gains them. > >One of the main reasons for doing SURBLs was to be able to >do something about the hosting companies who don't have AUPs >against spam or don't enforce them. > >Bottom line is that tripod, etc. are mostly irrelevant compared >to the professional spam gangs who send a lot more spam. SURBLs >are for listing the domains of the bigger fish who have found >spam-friendly hosts, regardless of where those hosts are. > All I can say to that is, it is small amount....for now. I don't see any harm in treating these as second and thrid TLDs. We are already doing all the same work, and seeing the same domains anyway while looking at spams. Why not just add them as 2-3 level? We are doing all the work now, and just throwing the listing away. --Chris

5 8

voicemessage . com listed in WS
by Fred 14 Oct '04

14 Oct '04

I received a virus today which included a link to virt.voicemessage . com This domain was registered 02-DEC-1996, I hand checked the domain, they appear to be a business partner with Avaya. Just because a virus uses this domain name in a attempt to trick the user, is not a reason to list. This domain appears in ham because when my customers receive undetected viruses, I ask them to send them to me and then it's part of mail I need to receive. Does anyone have any spam from this domain or was it listed solely on the fact that it appeared in a virus the committer received? Thanks!

3 3

submit domain?
by Lindsay Snider 13 Oct '04

13 Oct '04

acarmart DOT com What is our policy for adding domains like that above. It appears to be a link builder w/ no real content. And I appologise for not checking Jeff's website of criteria for adding a domain. I wasn't able to find a link so if any one has a bookmark available, I'd greatly appreciate it. -lindsay

2 2

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] submit domain?
by Chris Santerre 13 Oct '04

13 Oct '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 7:41 PM >To: SURBL Discuss >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] submit domain? > > >On Tuesday, October 12, 2004, 1:43:26 PM, Chris Santerre wrote: >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Lindsay Snider [mailto:lindsay@pa.net] >>>Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 2:43 PM >>>To: discuss(a)lists.surbl.org >>>Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] submit domain? >>> >>> >>>acarmart DOT com >>> >>>What is our policy for adding domains like that above. It >>>appears to be a >>>link builder w/ no real content. And I appologise for not >>>checking Jeff's >>>website of criteria for adding a domain. I wasn't able to >>>find a link so if >>>any one has a bookmark available, I'd greatly appreciate it. > > >> Jeff made us memorize it! > >> http://www.surbl.org/policy.html > >Speaking of which does anyone else think that policy is >good enough to link/publish yet? > +1 Go ahead ;) and post to public. --Chris

1 0

[ot] If you see this domain in spam....
by Chris Santerre 13 Oct '04

13 Oct '04

I need a shower after we removed this domain from SURBL: hypnoticsellingsecrets.com I would like to know if anyone gets a report of spam that has this domain in it. They just make me feel all icky. The more I read their site, the more I wished we didn't remove them. But...I need a spam. Thanks. --Chris

1 0

OT: tcsh filename expansion in file test
by Jeff Chan 13 Oct '04

13 Oct '04

UNIX question not directly related to SURBLs: does anyone know how to make filename expansion (globbing) happen inside a filetest in a tcsh script: unset noglob if (-e *.surbl.org.changed.multi) then ... Didn't work. It's supposed to test the existence of any files *.surbl.org.changed.multi . Using a specific file name like ws.surbl.org.changed.multi works, but I'd like to wildcard it. This has to do with making multi update sooner when the individual lists update, so maybe it's relevant. ;-) Jeff C. -- "If it appears in hams, then don't list it."

2 2

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] submit domain?
by Chris Santerre 13 Oct '04

13 Oct '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Lindsay Snider [mailto:lindsay@pa.net] >Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 2:43 PM >To: discuss(a)lists.surbl.org >Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] submit domain? > > >acarmart DOT com > >What is our policy for adding domains like that above. It >appears to be a >link builder w/ no real content. And I appologise for not >checking Jeff's >website of criteria for adding a domain. I wasn't able to >find a link so if >any one has a bookmark available, I'd greatly appreciate it. Jeff made us memorize it! http://www.surbl.org/policy.html ;) --Chris

3 2

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Revised DMOZ data, got Wikipedia domains too
by Chris Santerre 12 Oct '04

12 Oct '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 9:06 PM >To: SURBL Discussion list >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Revised DMOZ data, got Wikipedia domains >too > > >On Saturday, October 9, 2004, 1:09:43 PM, Patrik Nilsson wrote: > >> Just create a separate "TLDs or treat as TLDSs" zone that >can be checked >> and cached client side. > >> Or even better - give "TLDs or treat as TLDSs" a >distinguished A value in >> existing lists. >> If a lookup returns XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX, it is a "TLD or treat >as TLD" and >> should be further recursed. >> If we think there is a risk that some bad client >implementatins treat any >> returned A record as a hit, use TXT records. > >This is still an interesting idea, but I'd still be somewhat >concerned about putting out a list that looks like a regular >SURBL that it could get misused. > >But perhaps the larger issues is that the hard core spammers >don't seem to use *subdomains of legitimate shared-domain >hosting providers*. They just register their own full domain >names and use those (lots of them). > >If some legitimate hosting provider has an abuse issue, >then it's in their own interest to stop the abuse. > >SURBLs are arguably best suited for cases where the ISP >is spam-friendly and allows spam hosting on custom domains. >The reality is that's a much larger and tougher problem >than shared, common-domain hosting, like a geocities or >tripod. > >The best use of our time is to focus on the biggest spammers >first, and we're not catching all of those yet. > Big surprise...I disagree :-) I think we are already reviewing these domains, so why not just add to catch the smaller ones instead of throwing them away. But I see your vision, and I can bend like the reed ;) But given enough time, and perhaps enough chocolate, I think I can turn you around :-) --Chris

1 0

New data: SURBL DNS queries
by Jeff Chan 10 Oct '04

10 Oct '04

As has already been mentioned, Theo is patching SpamAssassin to locally whitelist some common whitehat URI domains for use in URIBL (which typically uses sbl and SURBL data) . This will prevent DNS queries on the whitehats and probably save some very significant traffic on the SURBL and spamhaus, etc. name servers. In order to get some better whitehat data, we increased the sampling of DNS queries on a name server from 32k (2k every 3 hours for 2 days) to 1.2 million (10k every 2 hours for 10 days). We're only about a third of the way through the initial 10 days, so the stats are still building up, but the current results are at: http://www.surbl.org/dns-queries.whitelist.counts.txt http://www.surbl.org/dns-queries.blocklist.counts.txt (These files have been mentioned before, but they're starting to get a lot more data behind them now.) Something else which was probably suggestion before, but which we *hadn't looked at before* were the DNS queries that *don't match* either our blocklists or whitelists. Those, sorted in order of decreasing frequency are: http://www.surbl.org/dns-queries.unmatched.30thpercentile.txt That's the top 30th percentile of them (about 3.6k records). The full list of unique domains and IPs with frequencies (about 110k records) is at: http://www.surbl.org/dns-queries.unmatched.count.txt Taking a look the top few of these: 333 56.227.117.38 211 internet.e 196 wwwlowmortnow.info 123 beliefnet.com 119 grisoft.com) 107 specialmax.net 99 democrats.org 99 115.14.249.209 96 and 90 c 82 centrport.net 78 charter.net 73 zdnet.com 65 cf.st 63 nuri1.net 62 red-hot1.com 62 imomentum.net 61 justsaywow.com 60 173.213.115.211 59 www 57 www.cool-loanco.kr 57 superduperfun.com 53 healthinsrus.com 51 e-directnet.net 51 agoramail.net 50 tmcs.net 50 latimes.com 50 dw.com.com 50 168.228.186.64 49 iscsimg.com 48 livedaily.com 48 eversave.com 47 1shoppingcart.com 46 srvimg.com 46 realone.com 46 goodnewsdelivery.com 45 rockbridgemedia.com 45 purdue.edu It's clear that a few are errors, probably due to problems in the applications using SURBLs. Yet it's probably useful to not suppress the errors so that the programs can be updated to handle them correctly. (Unfortunately the source URIs generating the errors are not directly available, but they may be identifiable in other ways if anyone would like to look for them.) Minus the errors, I fed this list into Ryan's GetURI to see what it could find. The results are at: http://ry.ca/cgi-bin/geturi.cgi?id=ham-5lCTzHkxan3xE38RKHa0vx Quite a few appear ok to whitelist, like democrats.org, pudue.edu, latimes.com, charter.net, zdnet.com, etc. and I'll probably go ahead and whitelist obvious ones like these, so some of these will probably be off this "unmatched" list and onto the whitelist hits by the time you read this. Nonetheless I recommend we all take a look at this unmatched list periodically, especially the top few dozen, to look for potential domains to whitelist or blacklist. These most frequently appearing domains are probably good candidates for one or the other. Since this is a list of the unknown "wild" domains coming from live, real-world message URIs, it may be another useful and different source of some data. Cheers, Jeff C. -- "If it appears in hams, then don't list it."

1 1

The plus side of FPs.
by Chris Santerre 09 Oct '04

09 Oct '04

We all hate FPs. We know we want to cut them down. But let me just say I have seen a nice plus to them. The whitelist requests for SURBL have been somewhat of an eye opener. There have been more then a few legit mailers who have drastically changed their ways since contacting us for whitelist. It is actually pretty amazing. They will 'fix' or at least try to 'fix' a lot of their messed up subscriptions just to get off of SURBL. Its all been polite and professional as well. We give examples of why they were added and ask for explanations. We also ask for a copy of their antispam/abuse policy. The responses have been outstanding. So we also have the power to educate. Yeah yeah yeah, I know. With great power comes great .....cheesecake. 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

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss