William Stearns wrote to SURBL Discussion list:
Good morning, Ryan,
On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Ryan Thompson wrote:
I know the SURBL.org FAQ documents the use of "MUNGED" to munge URIs for discussion. Personally, I think it's silly to do that while sending to this list, especially since, in the same heading, SURBL.org also suggests "It's probably a good idea to use less filtering on your anti-spam mailing list messages, or even to whitelist them". I think
Please remember that discussion of blacklisted domains also happens outside of this mailing list. I've had experiences where my emails to an sa-blacklist contributor about a blacklisted domain got relegated to a spam folder.
Agreed. Thus my comment (still quoted) of "it's silly to do that _while sending to this list_". What happens in private email is really up to the sender and recipient, and not within my intended scope of discussion.
Then how about a compromise? Instead of someMUNGEDwebsite.com, how about "somewebsite .com". Still completely human readable, but skips past spam filters. A win for everybody?
I'd rather not have *any* munging on mailing list mail. If you need to munge domains in private correspondence (and I do think *that* is still a good practice), that's really a separate discussion.
Oh, by the way, SpamAssassin, at least (and all others that I'm aware of), will not even parse body tokens of the form domain.com or 127.0.0.2
Spamassassin doesn't, but less sophisticated filters may not be so smart.
Right, and I'll even advocate spending some time to help fix them. :-)
- Ryan