[Fwd: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] First attempt to subvert surbl approach ? :)]

[Jeff Chan]

Hmm, maybe it helps to munge the spam domain?  :-)

Jeff C.
__

On Wednesday, April 21, 2004, 6:55:03 PM, David Coulson wrote:
> There's the problem - Sticking -munged doesn't help, since it just yanks 
> the domain right out of the middle.

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] First attempt to subvert surbl approach ? :)
> Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 17:58:44 -0700
> From: Jeff Chan <jeffc at surbl.org>
> To: discuss at lists.surbl.org

> Spam detection software, running on the system "umlcoop", has
> identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
> has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or block
> similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
> the administrator of that system for details.

> Content preview:  On Wednesday, April 21, 2004, 5:30:37 PM, Simon Byrnand
>    wrote: > Just browsing through my spam folder and noticed a spam with
>    the following URL: >
>    http://yahoo-MUNGED.com-EVEN-MORE.collectiza-MUNGEHERE.com-munged/vp9 [...]

> Content analysis details:   (8.8 points, 6.0 required)

>   pts rule name              description
> ---- ---------------------- 
> --------------------------------------------------
>   0.8 RATWR9_MESSID          Message-ID has ratware pattern (9999.99999999@)
>   3.0 WS_URI_RBL             URI's domain appears in spamcop database at 
> ws.surbl.org
>                              [yahoo-MUNGED.com-EVEN-MORE.collectiza.com is]
>                              [blacklisted in SpamCop RBL at ws.surbl.org]
>   5.0 SC_URI_RBL             URI's domain appears in spamcop database at 
> sc.surbl.org
>                              [yahoo-MUNGED.com-EVEN-MORE.collectiza.com is]
>                              [blacklisted in SpamCop RBL at sc.surbl.org]

Jeff C.