tourisme-montreal.org
Just sent a spam to our president. However it has legit uses. Screw them! Here is a nice fresh one for UC :)
--Chris
On Friday, September 3, 2004, 1:06:17 PM, Chris Santerre wrote:
tourisme-montreal.org
Just sent a spam to our president. However it has legit uses. Screw them! Here is a nice fresh one for UC :)
--Chris _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
What IP address did it come from?????
If it's their own mail server, just block the mail server. Don't SURBL it.
Jeff C.
On Friday, September 3, 2004, 3:07:38 PM, Jeff Chan wrote:
On Friday, September 3, 2004, 1:06:17 PM, Chris Santerre wrote:
tourisme-montreal.org
Just sent a spam to our president. However it has legit uses. Screw them! Here is a nice fresh one for UC :)
What IP address did it come from?????
If it's their own mail server, just block the mail server. Don't SURBL it.
I meant to send that off list.
But it begs the question: if you do add it to an unconfirmed list, then what? First of all, they're probably not major spammers. If you use it to warn them to be less spammy, that's fine, but it does nothing about the really hard core spammers.
Maybe after we solve the problem of zombie users by getting the SURBL data so clean that it can be used in MTAs or firewalls, then we can go back and get the marginal spammers. Until then we are simply diverting attention from the major troublemakers.
Jeff C.
On Friday, September 3, 2004, 1:06:17 PM, Chris Santerre wrote:
tourisme-montreal.org
Just sent a spam to our president. However it has legit
uses. Screw them!
Here is a nice fresh one for UC :)
--Chris
What IP address did it come from?????
If it's their own mail server, just block the mail server. Don't SURBL it.
So let me get this straight... He can't add it to SURBL because it has legit uses (which he's acknowledged), so you'd rather that he block their entire mail server including it's legit uses for all his users rather than build a list that could be used by SA to incrementally increase the spam score?
I'm sorry, but I just don't follow that logic....
Bret
On Friday, September 3, 2004, 3:46:34 PM, Bret Miller wrote:
On Friday, September 3, 2004, 1:06:17 PM, Chris Santerre wrote:
tourisme-montreal.org
Just sent a spam to our president. However it has legit
uses. Screw them!
Here is a nice fresh one for UC :)
What IP address did it come from?????
If it's their own mail server, just block the mail server. Don't SURBL it.
So let me get this straight... He can't add it to SURBL because it has legit uses (which he's acknowledged), so you'd rather that he block their entire mail server including it's legit uses for all his users rather than build a list that could be used by SA to incrementally increase the spam score?
It depends on the goals of the greylisters. If they're using it to pressure marginal spammers into spamming less, that's fine, but again they're dealing with marginal spammers and not the hard core ones.
If they're trying to block messages, there are much more efficient ways to do that with sender IP or sender domain since most of the marginal spammers probably are not using zombies. The difference in efficiency for blocking is probably multiple orders of magnitude.
Jeff C.
-
Bret Miller -
Chris Santerre -
Jeff Chan