I want to check on this before I add geocities as an exception (i.e. do not check against SURBL) - Is geocities one of the domains that would never end up on SURBL. I was doing an analysis this week against domains that always returned clean and number of times - and geocities was listed as #1.
Darrell
Darrell,
I can confirm that there is no chance that Geocities will ever get listed on SURBL because it is no the master white list.
Being on that list guarantees that it won't "accidentally" get on. In other words, if one of the many data feeders into SURBL suddenly fed Geocities .com into SURBL, it would NOT get listed because being on the master whitelist trumps all.
...but don't start asking about too many domains because the fear of getting onto SURBL is also an effective tool and I wouldn't want too many marginally listed entities (like fortune 500 companies who spam) to get too comfortable if they discovered that they were already on that whitelist :)
(not that it is necessarily that big of a secret... the whitelist might be publicly available? Jeff would know)
BTW - somebody DOES need to give Geocities a spanking because of their apparent lack of ability to prevent spammers from using their services. But SURBL is NOT the proper place to dole out that punishment because of the FPs it would create.
--Rob McEwen
Good evening, Rob,
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Rob McEwen wrote:
I can confirm that there is no chance that Geocities will ever get listed on SURBL because it is no the master white list.
Being on that list guarantees that it won't "accidentally" get on. In other words, if one of the many data feeders into SURBL suddenly fed Geocities .com into SURBL, it would NOT get listed because being on the master whitelist trumps all.
...but don't start asking about too many domains because the fear of getting onto SURBL is also an effective tool and I wouldn't want too many marginally listed entities (like fortune 500 companies who spam) to get too comfortable if they discovered that they were already on that whitelist :)
(not that it is necessarily that big of a secret... the whitelist might be publicly available? Jeff would know)
I'd rather it didn't, for the exact same reason as your previous paragraph. :-) Cheers, - Bill
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Nynex. Iroquois for Moron" -- A well-known Linux kernel hacker. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- William Stearns (wstearns@pobox.com). Mason, Buildkernel, freedups, p0f, rsync-backup, ssh-keyinstall, dns-check, more at: http://www.stearns.org --------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Friday, August 12, 2005, 6:06:31 PM, William Stearns wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Rob McEwen wrote:
I can confirm that there is no chance that Geocities will ever get listed on SURBL because it is no the master white list.
Being on that list guarantees that it won't "accidentally" get on. In other words, if one of the many data feeders into SURBL suddenly fed Geocities .com into SURBL, it would NOT get listed because being on the master whitelist trumps all.
...but don't start asking about too many domains because the fear of getting onto SURBL is also an effective tool and I wouldn't want too many marginally listed entities (like fortune 500 companies who spam) to get too comfortable if they discovered that they were already on that whitelist :)
(not that it is necessarily that big of a secret... the whitelist might be publicly available? Jeff would know)
I'd rather it didn't, for the exact same reason as your previousparagraph. :-) Cheers, - Bill
Bill and Rob are right: we don't publish the SURBL whitelist.
We can't and won't blacklist geocities because it obviously has legitimate uses and could get mentioned in ham. Yahoo is aware they have abuse problems and have been asked to address them.
Jeff C. -- Don't harm innocent bystanders.
Jeff Chan wrote:
Bill and Rob are right: we don't publish the SURBL whitelist.
Oops, I didn't know that, I've bookmarked the WL-hit link for this purpose.
Checking my public links I found that http://surbl.org doesn't work anymore, or maybe it never worked, I'll add the missing "www." asap.
http://multi.surbl.org also has no IP, that's bad, it should be an alias of www.surbl.org, and ideally your Web server should redirect it to a page like lists.html explaining what "multi" is, or to a page explaining the removal procedure.
That's still best current practice for all WLs and BLs, see http://purl.net/xyzzy/home/test/draft-irtf-asrg-dnsbl-01.txt
| Most DNSxLs also contain an A record at the DNSxL's name that | points to a web server, so that anyone wishing to learn about | the bad.example.net DNSBL can check http://bad.example.net.
Yes, the ASRG draft expired, but IMHO it's technically okay.
Bye, Frank
-
Darrell (support＠invariantsystems.com) -
Frank Ellermann -
Jeff Chan -
Rob McEwen -
William Stearns