Jeff Chan wrote:
On Thursday, September 9, 2004, 4:27:49 AM, Alex Broens wrote:
I'd exclude:
dartmail.net bezeqint.net havagreatday.com ohthatsfunny.com prod-infinitum.com.mx imgmailer.com blueyonder.co.uk webhostplus.com hinet.net
Pls don't ask me to justify. To me they're either black, dark grey or abused or don't care if.....
Alex
I guess you took a different snapshot of those domains than I did. Of the ones you mention, only:
bezeqint.net blueyonder.co.uk hinet.net prod-infinitum.com.mx
Are on my copy of the list and not already excluded as spammers.
http://spamcheck.freeapp.net/whitelists/senderbase-isps
These remaining ones are all large ISPs. They almost certainly have been abused briefly to send spams. But that's not the question. The question is should we allow their own domain names to be blocked when mentioned in messages?
How many spammers include the URI of their ISP in their spams? Is that a useful thing for them to do? Probably not, but even if they did, would we want to block on those ISP domain names?
I don't see them as "abused briefly" personally I seem them as a plague and as 99% free webmailers indirectly or diretly contribute to the SCAM/SPAM/Trash floods.
If "free" web mail would cost $5/annum, Nigeria would have to search for new export products.
if Open Relays, Zombies, Bogons, Spamhauses etc are a source of spam... IMHO the list aboves rates a new category.
Alex