[SURBL-Discuss] second and third level domains - again!
ekolve at comcast.net
Sun Apr 25 20:16:51 CEST 2004
On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 01:11:28PM +1200, Simon Byrnand wrote:
> At 05:50 26/04/2004, you wrote:
> >On Sun, Apr 25, 2004 at 05:57:56PM +0200, John Fawcett wrote:
> >> One of the things I noticed after upgrading to
> >> SpamCopURI 0.14 was that previously I had
> >> been identifying all mail containing ads.msn.com
> >> as spam and after the upgrade this was no
> >> longer happening.
> >> (BTW ads.msn.com was still listed in sc.surbl.org
> >> when I observed this behaviour. It has since been
> >> removed.)
> >To take care of this in the short term you
> >can add an entry to your spamcop_uri.cf if you
> >have open redirect resolution on:
> > open_redirect_list_spamcop_uri g.msn.com ads.msn.co
> Is that line correct ? or should it be something like:
> open_redirect_list_spamcop_uri g.msn.com *.ads.msn.com
*.ads.msn.com would match the following:
xxx.yyy.ads.msn.com, foo.ads.msn.com, but wouldn't match ads.msn.com.
I suppose you could do *ads.msn.com and match all of the above
plus ads.msn.com, but you would also match fads.msn.com.
This is from the core address list matching that ships with SA.
ads.msn.com will only match ads.msn.com. Putting g.msn.com and
ads.msn.com on the same line is no different than putting them
on separate lines. I just thought I would try to keep msn
stuff on the same line.
> ? Not sure that I quite understand the syntax. Would the link you suggested
> cover a URL like this:
Yes, it will.
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.surbl.org
More information about the Discuss