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

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Fri Dec 3 02:38:55 CET 2004

On Thursday, December 2, 2004, 2:10:29 PM, David Funk wrote:
> 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 ;).

I agree.  Probably user error in using spamware, or coding
problems in it.

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

Yep, and com.com and most other cnet domains we could find
are already whitelisted.

Jeff C.
"If it appears in hams, then don't list it."

More information about the Discuss mailing list