There is such a list being worked on called UC. I haven't been putting much effort into it as much as WS. But that is about to change very soon.
And I COMPLETELY agree with your example. More then you know. And I can't in good concience let that happen.
--Chris
-----Original Message----- From: Matthew Wilson [mailto:matthew@boomer.com] Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 3:25 PM To: SURBL Discussion list Cc: csanterre@merchantsoverseas.com Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] free host: greatnow.com
Folks,
If I were a spammer monitoring this list's traffic (there have got to be some), I would buy up a bunch of domains that were registered a few years ago but expired, throw up a bunch of bogus "legitimate looking" content, send out a bunch of spam using those "legitimate" domain names, and then complain to Jeff et al. that SURBL is generating false positives. According to current policies, my sites would be whitelisted, "yay!".
It's my opinion that you have to draw the line somewhere because of this, and hosting entities who don't have compliant AUPs or enforce their AUPs with any speed need to be listed somehow.
Jeff, you really should consider creating a separate "semi-legitimate" list for entities such as greatnow.com, if only to appease those of us who don't necessarily keep often-updated private blacklists and whitelists for SURBL queries/hits.
Thanks, Matthew Wilson.
-----Original Message----- From: discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org [mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Chan Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 1:29 PM To: SURBL Discuss Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] free host: greatnow.com
On Friday, October 22, 2004, 11:27:25 AM, Jeff Chan wrote:
There's a difference between removing the entire list and checking them carefully before using them.
We can use the data if we check it first.
Can you post or link the list so we can all see the data and comment on it?
Jeff C.
"If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss