Hello Jeff,
(sent one copy without attachment, and from not-listed address; that copy can be deleted without forwarding to list. sorry)
Monday, May 23, 2005, 3:00:09 AM, you wrote:
JC> Message: 7 JC> Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 00:57:48 -0700 JC> From: Jeff Chan jeffc@surbl.org JC> Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] whitelist: accuradio.com JC> To: Joseph Burford josephb@gmail.com JC> Cc: SURBL Discussion list discuss@lists.surbl.org JC> Message-ID: 127069243.20050523005748@surbl.org JC> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
JC> On Sunday, May 22, 2005, 11:39:05 PM, Joseph Burford wrote:
Since you say they're whitehats, I'll go ahead and whitelist them in SURBLs. Of minor interest one of their nameservers is on SORBS:
212.118.243.118 dns5.name-services.com
name-services.com is used by Register.com / Namebargain.com for their customer DNS services.
Regards,
Joseph
JC> Hmm, then it probably should not be blacklisted:
JC> black-rmenschel-200504:name-services.com
JC> Bob Menschel, JC> Can you comment further on this listing of yours on sa-blacklist/ JC> ws.surbl.org?
Spam is attached.
I agree that as DNS, name-services.com shouldn't be blocked, nor as received, since other viable emails come through them.
The only emails I've ever received /from/ name-services.com, and the only emails I've ever received with URI links to name-services.com, are like the attached. As far as I know, this is a scam.
I've never done any business with name-services.com, and never looked at obtaining any of their services.
I don't remember the exact steps I used April 27 to review this, but searching for their domain I found plenty of evidence of spam/scam, and no evidence that these people also sent out ham.
If they themselves are a registry, and do send ham to domain registrants that they haven't already scammed, then yes, I should remove them from my blacklist file. If they are primarily DNS services and do not send emails other than spam/scam, then they should remain.
Bob Menschel