[SURBL-Discuss] RE: RFC: Removing example.com as a testpoint (Was: Re: [SURBL-Dis cuss] Re: No install Problems with 0.10)

Chris Santerre csanterre at merchantsoverseas.com
Tue Apr 20 10:07:50 CEST 2004

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Byrnand [mailto:simon at igrin.co.nz]
> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 8:10 PM
> To: Jeff Chan; SURBL Discuss
> Subject: Re: RFC: Removing example.com as a testpoint (Was: Re:
> [SURBL-Discuss] Re: No install Problems with 0.10)


>Sounds fine to me....(since no one else is commenting :)

>The whole idea of surbl relies on the fact that there is no legitimate way 
>that a spam url would be found in a genuine message. This isn't too hard 
>considering how obscure and obfuscated most spammer domain names 
>are...they're not the kind of thing that you'd write by accident in casual 
>conversation :)

Oh I wouldn't say that is 100% true!

The following are the rules I removed from BigEvil. They are "Shammers",
people who send spam AND ham.  So these were the domains I had to remove
even though they had sent lots of spam. The one company they get as a
customer to send ham forces your hand to remove them. SURBL will need to
create a list like this sometime soon. 

uri BigEvilList_W	/\b(?:exacttarget\.com|pandasoftware\.com)\b/i

uri BigEvilList_X

uri BigEvilList_Y

uri BigEvilList_Z

Isn't this fun? :)


More information about the Discuss mailing list