Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
This discussion is kinda useless here.
Sooner or later many spammers will try to hide in the crowd, some free hoster without working abuse desk is a "good" idea.
you could ask to get it added on uribl.com
My question was why there are only two entries in the WL hit list. I know perfectly well why [see subject] is on the WL.
What's the precise purpose and content of this page: http://spamcheck.freeapp.net/whitelist-hits.new.log.sort
So far I thought that it counts "rejected submissions", but that's obviously not the case for [see subject].
List them in RFC-I, thats a appropriate list for domains bouncing abuse mails... :)
No, RFCI does not care about "incorrect" abuse.net entries, let alone any "evidence" in the form of "bounces SC reports". It was a short glitch in SC's logic, it used an address for...
cc.yahoo-inc.com (------10): .postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org cc.yahoo-inc.com (-----2--): .abuse.rfc-ignorant.org cc.yahoo-inc.com (-----2-0): .whois.rfc-ignorant.org whois -h whois.abuse.net cc.yahoo-inc.com postmaster@cc.yahoo-inc.com (for yahoo-inc.com)
...instead of using what it got from ARIN for the IP. As you see submitting it to RFCI would be a complete waste of time, it's already listed.
Working abuse addresses for [see subject] might be network-abuse@cc.yahoo-inc.com as reported by ARIN for the IP or uk-geo-abuse@cc.yahoo-inc.com (for uk. geocities .com) as reported by abuse.net for the FQDN.
Bye, Frank