Is it possible or advisable to whitelist all Bonded Senders? Are these truly non-spammers? Does anyone know where a list is published?
How about www.senderbase.org ?
Jeff C.
Hi!
Is it possible or advisable to whitelist all Bonded Senders? Are these truly non-spammers? Does anyone know where a list is published?
How about www.senderbase.org ?
I would not go that way, people can test on senderbase/bonded sender, and just like habaes this will be abused also. In my SA setup the above scores are also taken, and will bias the score...
Bye, Raymond.
On Saturday, September 4, 2004, 1:39:26 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
Is it possible or advisable to whitelist all Bonded Senders? Are these truly non-spammers? Does anyone know where a list is published?
How about www.senderbase.org ?
I would not go that way, people can test on senderbase/bonded sender, and just like habaes this will be abused also. In my SA setup the above scores are also taken, and will bias the score...
Are any of them grey? Bonded sender claims they have paid out only tiny amounts of bonds due to violations.
Remember that not everyone uses SA. I'd like to have a list of non-spammers to exclude from SURBLs.
Jeff C.
Hi Jeff,
How about www.senderbase.org ?
I would not go that way, people can test on senderbase/bonded sender, and just like habaes this will be abused also. In my SA setup the above scores are also taken, and will bias the score...
Are any of them grey? Bonded sender claims they have paid out only tiny amounts of bonds due to violations.
Remember that not everyone uses SA. I'd like to have a list of non-spammers to exclude from SURBLs.
I have requested rsync access on the zones, they have responded to that and we will setup a feed, afterwards i can have a look on the zones, and check a little better. More indepth...
Bye, Raymond.
On Saturday, September 4, 2004, 2:01:05 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
How about www.senderbase.org ?
I would not go that way, people can test on senderbase/bonded sender, and just like habaes this will be abused also. In my SA setup the above scores are also taken, and will bias the score...
Are any of them grey? Bonded sender claims they have paid out only tiny amounts of bonds due to violations.
Remember that not everyone uses SA. I'd like to have a list of non-spammers to exclude from SURBLs.
I have requested rsync access on the zones, they have responded to that and we will setup a feed, afterwards i can have a look on the zones, and check a little better. More indepth...
Sounds perfectly reasonable. We can check if any of their customers hit our lists.
Are there any other nominally whitehatting organizations we could check into? Are there any real whitehat certification groups?
What is senderbase?
Jeff C.
Jeff Chan wrote:
Are there any other nominally whitehatting organizations we could check into? Are there any real whitehat certification groups?
SpamCop checks two lists: query.bondedsender.org and iadb.isipp.com (and it has or had some special processing for HABEAS)
What is senderbase?
Like SpamCop and BondedSender another branch of Ironport. SenderBase somehow watches mail traffic, trying to catch "unusual" jumps (zombies starting to fire), but I'm not sure what they do.
If you check e.g. 68.34.85.3 with the SCBL web interface...
http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblock&ip=68.34.85.3
...then there's always a link to the Senderbase lookup:
http://www.senderbase.org/?searchBy=ipaddress&sb=1&searchString=68.34.85.3
Senderbase shows the traffic jump, some BLs where this IP is listed, links to OpenRBL / Google Groups / SC / BondedSeder, related IPs, etc.
For a better explanation see http://www.senderbase.org/
Bye, Frank
-
Frank Ellermann -
Jeff Chan -
Raymond Dijkxhoorn