[SURBL-Discuss] Discuss: WAS: SURBL+ Checker Submission

[David B Funk]

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Chris Santerre wrote:

> I stripped the header for this discussion. Is this a spam domain or an
> attempt to poison SURBL. It is obviously a spam, but is domain bogus?
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> *SNIP*
>
[snip..]
> >href=3D"http://hesatosser.com.info/?wid=3D100005">H=
> >ERE</a><br><br>
[snip..]
> ><a href=3D"http://hesatosser.com.info/?wid=3D100005">
> >Get it now
[snip..]
> > href=3D"http://http://hesatosser.com.com/nomore.html">Go
> >here</a> to stop=

Neither, it's broken spam-ware. The actual pill-spam-site
is "hesatosser .com" (which is listed in SURBL ;).

"*.com.com" is a valid domain name, belongs to CNet, clearly
not spam. "*.com.info" isn't even a valid domain at all.


-- 
Dave Funk                                  University of Iowa
<dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.edu>        College of Engineering
319/335-5751   FAX: 319/384-0549           1256 Seamans Center
Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_admin            Iowa City, IA 52242-1527
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{